^  PRTTVrj-RTOTVr      1ST      .T.  <vN 


Division.. 

Section  ..y.*^l. (L+. . I. . 


Shelf Number. 


- 


THE  ELEMENTS  OF 

BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION 


OR 


AN  EXPOSITION 


OF  THE  LAWS  BY  WHICH  THE  SCRIPTURES  ARE  CAPABLE 
OF  BEING  CORRECTLY  INTERPRETED  ; 

TOGETHER   WITH   AN   ANALYSIS    OF    THE 

RATIONALISTIC    AND   MYSTIC    MODES 

OF   INTERPRETING    THEM. 

ADAPTED    TO    COMMON   USE,    AND  DESIGNED  AS  AN  AUXILIARY 
TO  THE   CRITICAL    STUDY   OF   THE   BIBLE. 


BY  LEICESTER  A.  SAWYER,  A.  M. 


"  Whoso  rearfeth  let  him  underhand."—  Jesus  Christ. 


NEW  HAVEN  : 
PUBLISHED  BY  A.  K.  MALTBY", 

SOLD    BY    D.    APPLETON    &    CO.    AND    LEAVITT,    LORD    &    CO.    NEW    YORK 
HENRY    PERKINS,    PHILADELPHIA  ;    AND    BY    WILLIAM    PIERCE 
AND    PERKINS    &    MARVIN,    BOSTON. 

1836. 


Entered  according  to  the  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1836,  by 

Leicester  A.  Sawyer,  A.  M. 

in  the  Clerk's  office  of  the  Dictrict  Court  of  Connecticut. 


rilLS9  OF  P.  B.  WIIITMORE. 


CO] 


CHAPTER  I. 

PRELD1INARY  ESSAYS. 

Page 

Sec.  1.     Introductory  and  general  remarks,  .  5 

2.  The  necessity  of  the  right  exercise  of  the  men- 

tal   faculties,   in   the    interpretation  of  the 
Bible,  .....  10 

3.  Rules   for  the   right  exercise  of  judgment,  in 

Biblical  Interpretation,         .  .  .  l.j 

CHAPTER  II. 
THE  RULES  OR  LAWS  OF  BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION. 

Sec.  1.     Language  considered  as  a  symbol  of  thought,  21 

2.  The  interpretation    of  language,    particularly 

that  of  the  Bible,        .         .  .  .  24 

3.  Words  considered  as  the  elements  of  language,       30 

4.  General  principles  relating  to  the  meaning  of 

single  words,  ....  32 

5.  Rules  for  determining  the  literal  meaning  of 

single  words,  ....  50 

6.  Rules  for  determining  when  words  are  used  in 

a  tropical  or  figurative  sense,         .  .  82 


IV  CONTENTS. 

Page 

7.  Rules  for    determining  the  sense   of  tropical 

or  figurative  words,  ...  87 

8.  Rules  for  determining  the  signification  of  alle- 

gories,        .....  93 

CHAPTER  III. 

SUBSIDIARY  AND  PARTICULAR  LAWS  OF   BIBLICAL  IN- 
TERPRETATION. 

Sec.  1.     The  interpretation  of  the  Scriptural  system  of 

doctrines,  .  .  .  .  100 

2.  General   principles   relating   to   the    material 

types  and  symbols  of  the  Bible,  .  117 

3.  Rules  for  determining  the  signification  of  ma- 

terial types  and  symbols,  .  .  124 

4.  General  principles  relating  to  the  prophecies,         136 

5.  Rules  for  determining  the  signification  of  the 

prophecies,  .  142 

G.     The  interpretation  of  the  Bible  considered  as 

a  translation.         ....  153 

CHAPTER  IV. 
ERRONEOUS  MODES  OF  BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION. 
Sec.  1.     The  Rationalistic  mode   of  Biblical  Interpre- 
tation,        .....  1(31 
2.     The  Mystic  mode  of  Biblical  Interpretation,          171 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION. 


CHAPTER  I. 
PRELIMINARY  ESSAYS. 

Seg.  1.  Introductory  and  general  remarks. 

1.  Jgnorance  of  the  principles  and  rules  of  Inter- 
pretation, is  one  of  the  greatest  obstacles  in  the  way 
of  obtaining  a  correct  knowledge  of  the  Bible.  Lan- 
guage is  a  medium  of  communication  between  man 
and  his  fellow  man.  Through  this  medium  the 
thoughts,  desires  and  determinations  of  one  mind  are 
made  known  to  another.  God  has  made  communi- 
cations of  truth  to  the  world,  both  by  the  natural 
objects  of  perception,  and  by  the  instrumentality  of 
human  language.  He  did  not  form  a  new  language 
to  be  the  medium  of  communication  between  himself 
and  his  creatures,  but  made  use  of  that  already  form- 
ed and  in  use  by  them.  Neither  did  he  construct  this 
language  anew  to  make  it  answer  his  purpose ;  he 
took  it  just  as  it  was,  and  used  it  just  as  he  found  it, 
for  the  benevolent  purpose  of  instructing  his  creatures 
in  the  way  of  life  and  salvation.  In  the  earlier  ages 
of  the  world  he  found  the  Hebrew  in  use,  and  he  then 
made  his  communications  in  that.  In  later  times,  the 
Hebrew  being  less  generally  understood,  and  the 

2 


6  PRELIMINARY   ESSAYS. 

Greek  more  generally  known,  he  made  his  communi- 
cations in  Greek.  Having  made  his  communications 
once,  he  leaves  them  to  be  studied  and  interpreted  by 
his  subjects ;  to  be  studied  in  the  same  manner  in 
which  we  study  other  writings,  and  to  be  interpret- 
ed by  the  same  rules. 

Those  who  are  not  acquainted  with  the  original 
languages,  may  still  have  the  benefit  of  this  blessed 
volume  translated  into  their  vernacular  tongues,  by 
learned  and  pious  men.  Translations  are  made  into 
almost  all  modern  languages,  which  are  extensively 
used,  and  many  of  them  are  made  with  the  greatest 
possible  care,  and  by  men  equally  distinguished  for 
their  learning  and  piety.  Our  common  translation 
was  not  only  made  with  the  greatest  care,  by  men  of 
distinguished  learning  and  piety  ;  but  it  has  received 
the  approbation  of  a  long  list  of  worthies  of  all  ortho- 
dox denominations  of  Christians. 

2.  But  in  whatever  method  divine  truth  is  ap- 
proached, and  by  whatever  medium  it  is  brought 
within  our  reach,  we  ought  to  be  mainly  anxious  to 
drink  of  its  healing  waters.  Whether  we  read  the 
Sacred  Scriptures  in  their  original  or  in  our  own  ver- 
nacular tongue,  we  ought  to  be  careful  to  understand 
them  aright. 

The  truths  of  the  Bible  can  do  us  good  only  as  far 
as  we  understand  and  apply  them.  Just  as  far  as  we 
misunderstand  the  Bible,  and  mistake  its  meaning, 
we  lose  the  benefits  which  it  is  designed  to  convey, 
and  subject  ourselves  to  the  evils  it  was  intended  to 
correct. 

While  a  right  understanding  of  the  Bible  is  ad- 


PRELIMINARY   ESSAYS.  7 

mitted  by  all  candid  and  intelligent  students  of  it,  to 
be  of  incalculable  benefit  and  of  inestimable  value  ; 
and  while  so  many  loose,  erroneous,  and  contradic- 
tory views  are  entertained  on  the  subject  of  its  com- 
munications, it  is  truly  surprising  that  the  theory  of 
Biblical  Interpretation  has  not  been  more  generally  a 
subject  of  investigation  and  inquiry. 

Other  branches  of  knowledge  have  received  at 
least  a  share  of  public  attention  ;  this  has  by  the  mul- 
titude been  almost  entirely  overlooked  and  neglect- 
ed. Indeed  it  is  hardly  known  by  many  a  fierce  re- 
ligious disputant  and  wrangler  in  our  land,  that  there 
is  any  such  science  as  that  of  Biblical  Interpretation. 

But  though  neglected  by  the  common  people,  be- 
lievers and  unbelievers,  the  most  accurate  Biblical 
scholars  have  devoted  to  it  a  large  share  of  their  at- 
tention. In  the  seats  of  learning,  and  by  the  most 
successful  cultivators  of  Biblical  knowledge,  it  has 
been  studied  with  constantly  increasing  interest  and 
benefit,  both  to  themselves  and  the  world  with  whom 
they  communicate. 

Lectures  and  other  scientific  instructions  are  given 
on  this  subjeet  in  our  best  Theological  Seminaries, 
and  theablestexpounders  of  God's  word  are  devoting 
themselves  to  this  study  with  singular  assiduity  and 
zeal. 

3.  A  concise  and  elemontary  treatise  on  the  sub- 
ject of  Biblical  Interpretation,  briefly  explaining  its 
fundamental  principles  and  rules,  and  presenting 
them  to  view  in  their  mutual  relations  and  depend- 
encies, has  long  been  needed.  This  need  has  been 
felt  and  expressed,  by  at  least  a  respectable  portion 


8  PRELIMINARY   ESSAYS. 

of  the  Christian  public.  There  is  nothing  of  the  kind 
in  circulation  at  present  in  this  country.  Prof. 
Stuart's  translation  of  Ernesti,  is  not  of  a  popular 
character,  and  is  not  adapted  to  interest  and  instruct 
the  general  reader,  though  deeply  interesting  to  the 
accurate  Classical  and  Biblical  scholar. 

4.  In  the  present  elementary  treatise  an  endeavor 
has  been  made  to  exhibit  the  fundamental  principles 
and  rules  of  Biblical  Interpretation,  in  such  a  man- 
ner, as  to  place  them  within  the  reach  and  compre- 
hension of  every  intelligent  reader  of  the  English 
language.  These  rules  are  accompanied  with  such 
illustrations  and  examples,  as  will  sufficiently  evince 
their  truth  and  show  their  application.  The  system 
of  Interpretation  exhibited  in  the  following  pages,  is 
substantially  the  same  as  that  of  Ernesti.  Technical 
expressions  however  are  generally  avoided,  as  being 
not  adapted  to  instruct  the  great  body  of  the  Chris- 
tian community  for  whose  benefit  this  manual  is  more 
particularly  designed. 

5.  In  applying  the  following  rules  of  Interpreta- 
tion to  the  Bible,  it  is  to  be  remembered,  that  the  holy 
word  of  God  is  to  be  approached  with  the  profound- 
est  reverence.  Rash  and  hasty  judgments  are  not 
for  a  moment  to  be  tolerated  in  relation  to  those  vi- 
tally important  subjects,  which  the  Bible  unfolds  to 
our  view.  Here,  if  any  where,  when  examining  this 
blessed  book  if  ever,  we  are  to  proceed  with  delibera- 
tion, and  judge  with  candor  and  caution.  How  much 
is  lost  by  a  neglect  to  do  this,  no  tongue  can  tell,  and 
no  pen  describe.  Much  of  the  error  in  faith  and 
practice,  with  which  the  world  is  flooded,  may  be 


PRELIMINARY   ESSAYS.  9 

traced  to  this  prolific  source  ;  men  leap  to  their  con- 
clusions on  religious  subjects,  before  they  well  un- 
derstand the  premises ;  and  those  conclusions  are 
such  as  suit  their  own  misguided  fancy,  whether  they 
can  be  deduced  from  the  word  of  God  by  fair  means 
or  foul. 

Many  undertake  the  study  of  the  Bible  with  their 
ultimate  conclusions  all  predetermined.  They  look 
into  it,  not  to  hear  what  God  is  pleased  to  say,  for  the 
purpose  of  deterring  them  from  sin,  and  exciting  them 
to  seek  holiness  and  heaven  ;  but  to  see  what  they 
can  find,  to  establish  themselves  in  this  and  that  fa- 
vorite opinion.  That  such  persons  should  make  much 
progress  in  sound  scriptural  knowledge  is  not  to  be 
expected.  They  do  not  labor  to  correct  their  errors 
and  enlarge  their  views,  a  work  which  cannot  be  ac- 
complished without  labor.  They  only  strive  to  con- 
firm themselves  in  their  preconceived  opinions :  in 
that  they  generally  succeed,  no  matter  how  absurd 
those  opinions  may  be. 

6.  Let  the  work  of  Biblical  Interpretation  be  un- 
dertaken with  honesty  and  humility.  Human  opin- 
ions are  an  empty  sound,  and  even  learning  is  a 
vain  show  when  arrayed  against  the  truths  of  the 
Bible. 

Truth  will  stand  ;  it  is  destined  to  a  glorious  and 
universal  triumph.  It  will  bless  and  comfort  all 
those  who  hold  it  in  righteousness.  It  has  outlived 
the  scoffs  of  the  most  heaven-daring  infidels.  The 
mists  of  scepticism  cannot  conceal  and  essentially 
darken  it,  the  storms  of  persecution  have  been  una- 
ble to  sweep  it  away.  Woe  to  the  man  who  lifts  up 
2* 


10  PRELIMINARY   ESSAYS. 

his  puny  hand  against  Divine  truth.  In  doing  this, 
he  rebels  against  God,  and  treasures  up  wrath  against 
the  day  of  wrath,  to  be  poured  out  upon  his  guilty 
soul. 

Joy  to  that  man  who  is  on  the  side  of  truth.  Truth 
will  be  on  his  side.  If  he  has  taken  the  part  of  truth 
against  an  angry  and  unbelieving  world,  truth  will 
take  his  part  against  all  that  may  threaten  to  disturb 
his  peace  and  destroy  his  soul.  By  God's  truth  he 
shall  be  sanctified,  and  being  sanctified  shall  enjoy  a 
blissful  eternity  with  Him,  whose  words  are  truth, 
whose  favor  is  life,  whose  loving-kindness  is  better 
than  life. 

The  work  of  Biblical  Interpretation  is  easy  to  the 
candid,  attentive  and  prayerful  inquirer.  By  such,  the 
principles  and  leading  rules  of  this  interesting  science, 
will  be  readily  apprehended.  To  the  captious  and 
caviling,  they  will  be  more  difficult  of  acquisition  ; 
but  some  knowledge  on  this  subject  may  be  obtain- 
ed even  by  them,  if  they  will  consent  patiently  to  ex- 
amine it,  in  the  exercise  of  their  good  common  sense, 
to  see  if  these  things  are  so. 

Sec.  2.  The  necessity  of  a  right  exercise  of 
the  mental  faculties  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  bible. 

1.  The  Bible  is  addressed  to  mankind  as  rational 
beings,  and  is  evidently  designed  to  be  a  manual  of 
instruction,  not  to  a  few  privileged  individuals  only, 
but  to  the  human  race.  It  consists  of  a  collection  of 
Divinely  inspired  writings,  the  productions  of  differ- 
ent persons,  living  indifferent  ages  of  the  world,  and 


PRELIMINARY   ESSAYS.  11 

using  different  languages  and  modes  of  speech.  Ev- 
ery part  of  it  bears  manifest  marks  of  having  been 
designed  to  convey  information  which  was  deemed 
of  serious  and  high  importance. 

This  singular  book,  exceeding  all  others  in  the 
importance  and  variety  of  its  communications,  con- 
taining the  most  ancient  and  well  authenticated  his- 
tory ;  the  most  remarkable  and  undoubted  prophe- 
cy ;  the  purest  morality  ;  and  the  only  rational  sys- 
tem of  religious  worship ;  is  given  us  by  God  as  the 
only  authoritative  rule  of  faith  and  practice. 

To  its  pages  we  are  referred  for  information  re- 
specting our  duties  and  destiny.  A  competent 
knowledge  of  its  disclosures,  and  a  due  conformity 
to  its  precepts,  are  indispensably  necessary  to  the 
promotion  of  our  highest  temporal  or  spiritual  good. 
They  are  an  indispensable  pre-requisite  to  our  final 
and  eternal  salvation.  Whatever  may  be  the  final 
allotment  of  a  conscientious  heathen,  who  lives  in 
unavoidable  ignorance  of  this  blessed  volume,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  that  those  who  being  in  possession 
of  it,  fail  of  obtaining  a  competent  knowledge  of  its 
saving  truths,  will  certainly  perish  in  their  ignorance. 

Faith  is  insisted  on  in  the  Bible,  as  a  fundamental 
duty  ;  but  we  cannot  believe  any  further  than  we 
understand  the  true  meaning  of  the  Divine  communi- 
cations. 

The  fact  therefore  that  we  are  required  to  believe 
what  God  has  communicated  in  the  Bible,  for  our  in- 
struction, proves  that  we  are  required  to  understand 
those  instructions  correctly.  For  how  is  it  possible 
for  us  to  believe  what  we  do  not  understand  ? 


12  PRELIMINARY   ESSAYS. 

In  being  required  to  exercise  faith  in  the  Divine 
communications,  we  are  of  course  required  to  attain 
the  amount  and  degree  of  knowledge,  which  is  re- 
quisite to  the  intelligent  performance  of  this  exercise. 
When  that  degree  and  amount  of  knowledge  is  un- 
attainable, the  exercise  of  a  corresponding  faith  is 
impossible. 

It  is  obvious  therefore,  that  we  are  not  at  liberty 
to  misunderstand  or  incorrectly  interpret  the  Bible. 
We  are  under  an  indispensable  obligation  to  inter- 
pret the  word  of  God  correctly.  The  misunder- 
standing of  it  in  respect  to  any  of  its  fundamental 
truths,  is  not  only  a  misfortune,  but  a  sin  ;  and  one 
which  God  has  declared  he  will  severely  punish. 

The  fact  that  we  are  under  obligation  to  obtain  a 
correct  understanding  of  the  Bible,  so  far  at  least  as 
to  attain  the  exercise  of  saving  faith,  and  the  practice 
of  evangelical  obedience,  must  be  obvious  to  every 
candid  and  enlightened  inquirer. 

2.  From  this  truth  the  following  equally  important 
truths,  may  be  clearly  deduced. 

(1.)  That  the  Bible  has  a  determinate  sense. 

(2.)  That  we  are  competent,  with  such  aids  as  are 
within  our  reach,  to  ascertain  that  sense  with  cer- 
tainty. 

If  the  Bible  had  no  determinate  sense,  it  could  not 
be  our  duty  to  understand  it  as  having  one.  So  also 
if  we  were  incompetent,  with  such  aids  as  may  be 
obtained,  to  as  certain  the  true  sense  of  the  Sacred 
Scriptures,  no  matter  how  clear  and  obvious  that 
sense  might  be  to  higher  intelligences,  it  could  not 
be  our  duty  to  acquire  it ;  neither  could  that  at- 


PRELIMINARY    ESSAYS.  13 

tainment  with  any  propriety  be  made  in  any  way 
conditional  to  our  salvation. 

The  position  which  is  often  assumed  by  the  igno- 
rant and  unbelieving,  that  the  Bible  has  no  determin- 
ate sense;  or  that  its  true  meaning,  if  it  has  one,  is 
utterly  unattainable  by  the  human  mind,  is  seen  to 
be  entirely  false  and  ruinous.  It  is  equally  at  vari- 
ance with  the  Sacred  Scriptures  and  with  reason  it- 
self. 

3.  The  fact  that  the  Bible  is  intelligible,  is  a  pleas- 
ing and  important  one.  But  it  does  not  authorize 
the  belief  that  the  Divine  communications  can  be  un- 
derstood without  attention  and  effort.  The  reverse 
is  obvious.  Experience  and  observation  abundant- 
ly testify,  that  a  careless  and  inattentive  perusal  of 
the  Sacred  Scriptures,  is  exceedingly  liable  to  mis- 
lead the  mind  in  respect  to  many  most  important  re- 
ligious truths. 

Amidst  the  conflicting  opinions  that  prevail  in  re- 
lation to  many  important  religious  subjects,  it  is  ob- 
vious that  many  are  wrong.  Many  intelligent  per- 
sons do  fail  entirely  of  understanding  aright  some  of 
the  most  important  developments  of  the  Divine  will. 

But  to  what  is  this  failure  to  be  attributed  ?  Not 
to  any  imperfection  in  the  Inspired  Oracles  of  God  ; 
not  to  any  want  of  adaptation  in  them  to  the  limited 
capacities  of  the  human  mind  ;  but  to  the  perverted 
and  negligent  use  of  those  capacities,  in  the  investi- 
gation of  divine  truth. 

A  negligent  and  perverted  use  of  the  human  facul- 
ties, is  therefore  a  principal  cause  of  damnable  error. 
In  the  Interpretation  of  the  Bible,  the  mind  must  be 


14  PRELIMINARY    ESSAYS. 

vigorously  and  correctly  exercised  in  order  to  bring 
us  to  a  correct  result.  If  we  have  fallen  into  serious 
errors  in  this  department  of  human  knowledge,  we 
may  take  the  blame  of  those  errors  to  ourselves.  It 
will  be  in  vain  to  charge  them  upon  any  other  being.  • 

God  has  not  in  any  of  his  dispensations  encoura- 
ged either  indolence  or  negligence.  Least  of  all  has 
he  done  this  in  the  dispensation  of  truth,  whether  re- 
lating to  human  science  or  religion. 

While  the  sluggish  exercise  of  the  mental  faculties 
in  the  investigation  of  Divine  truth  generally  fails  of 
securing  the  attainment  of  much  useful  knowledge  ; 
the  diligent  and  careful  exercise  of  the  same,  is  at- 
tended with  a  rich  reward  and  crowned  with  unlook- 
ed  for  success.  In  the  Interpretation  of  the  Bible, 
we  find  work  for  our  highest  mental  faculties,  and 
that  which  requires  their  most  effective  exercise. 
Memory,  Judgment,  and  even  Imagination  are  sum- 
moned to  put  forth  their  mightiest  efforts  in  this 
work.  It  is  indispensably  necessary  to  our  greatest 
success,  that  they  should  all  do  their  part. 

Imagination  however,  is  to  be  exercised  with  great 
caution  in  this  field,  as  in  most  others,  and  only 
within  its  legitimate  domains.  The  unlicensed 
range  often  given  to  this  faculty  in  the  Interpreta- 
tion of  the  Bible,  leads  to  the  most  disastrous,  and 
even  fatal  results.  It  is  the  parent  of  extravagance 
and  enthusiasm,  and  the  author  of  immense  injuries 
to  the  cause  of  truth  and  piely. 


preliminary  essays.  15 

Sec.  3.  Rules  for  the  right  exercise  of  judg- 
ment  IN  BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION. 

1.  We  ought  never  to  form  a  judgment  till  we 
have  duly  considered  the  evidences  which  relate  to 
the  case  under  consideration.  The  guide  of  Judg- 
ment is  evidence.  To  determine  the  most  trifling 
matter  without  a  perfect  knowledge  of  the  evidence 
relating  to  it,  as  far  as  that  knowledge  can  be  ob- 
tained, is  to  prejudge  the  case,  and  to  surrender  the 
interests  of  truth  to  the  guidance  of  conjecture.  Our 
conjecture  may  be  right;  but  it  is  far  more  likely  to 
be  wrong,  inasmuch  as  the  chances  for  error  are  far 
the  most  numerous. 

The  formation  of  judgments  in  the  Interpretation 
of  the  Scriptures  without  a  due  knowledge  and  con- 
sideration of  the  evidences  relating  to  each  several 
case,  is  one  of  the  most  fruitful  sources  of  error.  No 
degree  of  energy  or  aculeness  of  our  natural  facul- 
ties of  judgment,  can  compensate  for  the  want  of  ev- 
idences in  the  formation  of  our  religious  opinions  and 
belief. 

Powerful  and  improved  natural  faculties  qualify 
us  to  use  evidences  to  the  greatest  advantage  and 
with  the  greatest  success,  but  they  do  not  qualify  us 
to  judge  without  evidence,  or  with  that  which  is  im- 
perfect and  indecisive,  any  more  than  strong  and 
acute  powers  of  vision  enable  us  to  see  without 
light,  or  to  see  clearly  by  the  aid  only  of  a  few  scat- 
tered rays  of  that  element. 

Persons  may  be  ever  so  well  acquainted  with  the 
principles  and  rules  of  Interpretation,  so  far  as  lan- 
guage is  concerned,  and  yet  by  forming  their  judg- 


16  PRELIMINARY    ESSAYS. 

merits  hastily  and  without  due  knowledge  and  con- 
sideration of  the  evidence  relating  to  the  case,  fall  in- 
to the  grossest  errors. 

In  this  way  many  important  portions  of  the  word 
of  God  are  daily  misinterpreted,  which  are  neverthe- 
less capable  of  being  fully  and  perfectly  understood. 
Judgment  is  only  the  interpreter  of  evidence.  It  is 
the  eye  which  sees  that  truth  only  on  which  the  light 
of  evidence  is  thrown  ;  and  with  a  clearness  and  cer- 
tainty proportioned  to  the  clearness  and  force  of  the 
evidence  by  which  it  is  determined. 

A  cautious  consideration  of  evidence  and  a  rigid 
adherence  to  it,  in  the  Interpretation  of  the  Bible,  is 
the  more  important,  because  when  erroneous  opin- 
ions are  once  formed,  it  is  extremely  difficult  to  dis- 
lodge them.  The  same  light  that  would  have  put 
us  in  possession  of  the  truth  before  an  erroneous 
opinion  was  imbibed,  will  seldom  be  sufficient  to  ef- 
fect the  correction  of  that  opinion.  When  a  case 
has  been  prejudged,  and  the  mind  has  settled  down 
in  erroneous  views  of  it,  months  and  years  of  labori- 
ous study  may  be  utterly  ineffective  as  to  the  discov- 
ery of  truth,  which,  previous  to  the  adoption  of  the 
error  in  question,  might  have  been  ascertained  in  a 
day,  perhaps  in  an  hour.  The  strongest  intellect  is 
almost  as  much  the  dupe  of  error  when  once  embra- 
ced, as  the  weakest.  The  mighty  in  intellect  are 
bound  as  strongly  with  the  cords  of  this  captivity  as 
the  feeble  ;  and  seldom  effect  their  escape  when  once 
fully  enthralled  in  delusion. 

2.  We  should  give  their  due  weight  and  influence 
to  all  the  items  of  evidence  which  relate  to  each  sev- 


PRELIMINARY   ESSAYS.  17 

eral  case  of  Interpretation.  This  rule  follows  natur- 
ally the  admission  of  (he  former.  Different  modes 
of  Interpretation  suggest  themselves  in  connexion 
with  different  items  of  evidence  by  which  they  are 
supported.  The  sources  of  evidence  ought  to  be  as- 
certained and  examined,  and  the  items  furnished  by 
each  particular  source,  carefully  considered  and  com- 
pared. Our  final  judgment  ought  to  be  the  r<  suit 
of  this  extended  investigation.  Nothing  less  than 
this,  can  be  satisfactory  or  safe. 
fc  This  rule,  like  the  former,  is  often  violated.  It  is 
not  uncommon  for  persons  to  fix  on  a  particular 
item,  or  class  of  evidences,  to  the  entire  neglect  of 
others  in  favor  of  a  different  opinion,  and  which  are 
entitled  to  an  equal  amount  of  influence  in  the  deter- 
mination of  our  judgments.  Decisions  thus  obtain- 
ed are  necessarily  partial  and  erroneous. 

Whenever  the  evidences  in  relation  to  the  true  im- 
port of  a  passage  of  Scripture  are  contradictory, 
they  must  be  compared;  and  that  which  preponder- 
ates must  determine  our  belief.  Such  cases  are  not 
uncommon.  They  do  not  occur  from  any  defect  or 
imperfection  in  the  Inspired  Oracles,  but  from  the 
limited  nature  of  the  human  understanding  ;  and  the 
necessarily  limited  materials  from  a  consideration  of 
which,  our  judgments  must  be  formed. 

3.  We  ought  to  investigate  the  Scriptures,  es- 
pecially those  parts  which  admit  of  different  modes 
of  Interpretation,  and  the  true  meaning  of  which  is 
a  matter  of  controversy,  dispassionately  and  im- 
partially. 

There  is  no  sufficient  reason  for  our  being  strong- 
3 


18  PRELIMINARY   ESSAYS. 

ly  interested  in  favor  of  any  mode  of  Interpretation  ; 
or  strongly  prejudiced  against  it,  till  we  have  before 
our  minds  he  i  vidence  of  its  truth  and  correctness, 
or  the  contrary.  The  same  principle  is  universally 
acknowledged  to  be  valid  in  relation  to  the  investiga- 
tion of  other  subjects.  We  ought  to  preserve  our 
minds  as  far  as  possible  unbiassed  in  favor  of  any 
opinions  or  against  them,  till  we  have  obtained  deci- 
sive evidence  of  their  correctness  or  incorrectness. 

Feeling  is  no  criterion  by  which  to  judge  of  truth. 
The  moment  it  becomes  excited,  it  presents  an  ob- 
struction to  the  exercise  of  impartial  judgment,  which 
no  art  or  power  of  man  may  be  able  to  remove  or  over- 
come.  V\  hile  feelings  of  attachment  or  aversion  are 
un  xcited,  the  understanding  may  be  informed,  and 
the  judgment  influenced  by  the  full  force  of  evidence. 
But  as  soon  as  feelings  of  aversion  are  once  aroused 
against  the  truth,  an  effect  that  may  easily  be  pro- 
duced by  incorrect  associations,  every  avenue  to  the 
judgment  is  effectually  closed  against  evidences,  by 
which  that  truth  is  ascertained. 

It  is  not  intended  by  these  remarks  to  discourage 
the  exercise  of  excited  feelings.  They  ought  to  be 
indulged  and  cherished  in  their  proper  place,  but  not 
to  the  prejudice  of  truth.  A  court  of  justice  has  no 
right  to  hear  and  adjudge  causes  under  the  influence 
of  excitement.  In  the  investigation  of  the  Sacred  Or- 
acles, the  same  disturbing  cause  ought  to  be  careful- 
ly avoided,  and  for  equally,  and  if  possible,  still  more 
obvious  and  weighty  reasons.  The  indiscretion  con- 
tended against,  is  exceedingly  common  and  perni- 
cious.   The  most  grave  investigations,  those  involv- 


PRELIMINARY    ESSAYS.  19 

ing  the  eternal  welfare  of  individuals,  families,  or 
communities,  are  frequently  prosecuted  under  the 
highest  excitement  of  party  feeling.  It  is  unneces- 
ry  to  say,  that  in  such  circumstances,  truth  is  put  in 
imminent  peril.  Let  truth  be  first  dispassionately 
and  impartially  investigated,  and  then,  and  not  till 
then,  let  feelings  of  love  or  hatred,  of  attachment  or 
aversion,  be  excited  or  indulged.  Then  it  will  be 
right  and  safe  to  indulge  such  feelings  as  truth  is 
adapted  to  awaken. 

4.  We  ought  to  investigate  every  different  pas- 
sage of  Scripture,  and  every  different  subject  by  it- 
self. Valuable  knowledge  is  gained  by  attending  to 
one  thing  at  a  time.  When  we  look  at  one  object 
with  our  natural  eyes,  we  are  able  to  see  it  clearly 
and  distinctly  ;  but  when  we  attempt  to  embrace  a 
number  of  objects  in  our  view,  we  do  not  gain  a  dis- 
tinct perception  of  any  of  them.  The  same  principle 
applies  to  our  intellectual  vision.  We  cannot  view 
distinctly  different  truths  at  once.  Moral  and  reli- 
gious investigations  are  frequently  embarrassed  by 
several  different  subjects  being  blended  confusedly 
together  in  the  same  inquiry  ;  whereas  every  differ- 
ent subject  ought  to  be  discriminated  from  all  others, 
and  examined  by  itself. 

It  is  one  of  the  devices  of  sophistry  and  of  deceiv- 
ers, to  produce  a  confusion  of  ideas  by  blending  sub- 
jects that  ought  to  be  viewed  separately,  and  as  sep- 
arate. But  this  method  of  procedure  finds  no  place 
in  the  theory  of  rational  investigation,  whether  of  re- 
ligious subjects,  or  of  any  other.  The  principle  in- 
sisted on  in  this  paragraph,  is  one  of  universal  appli- 


20  PRELIMINARY    ESSAYS. 

cation.  It  applies  equally  to  science,  business,  and 
religion ;  and  in  every  application  of  it,  is  found  to 
be  of  fundamental  importance.  It  cannot  in  any 
case  be  neglected  with  safety.  The  man  who  disre- 
gards it,  must  suffer  the  penalty  due  to  a  violation  of 
one  of  the  leading  principles  of  successful  exertion 
in  any  department  of  effort. 

The  foregoing  rules  relative  to  the  right  exercise 
of  the  mind  in  Biblical  Interpretation,  are  all  impor- 
ant  to  be  known  and  observed.  The  neglect  of  them 
leads  certainly  and  unavoidably  to  error,  with  all  its 
ruinous  consequences.  We  cannot  reasonably  ex- 
pect to  form  right  judgments,  unless  we  exercise  our 
minds  on  the  subject  in  hand,  in  a  proper  manner. 
And  we  have  abundant  occasion  for  gratitude  and 
joy,  that  in  the  right  exercise  of  our  mental  faculties 
we  cannot  fail  of  obtaining  whatever  knowledge  is 
essential  to  our  present  or  future  felicity.  So  far  as 
the  right  exercise  of  judgment  and  other  mental  fac- 
ulties will  lead  us  to  correct  results  in  the  business  of 
Biblical  Interpretation,  we  ought  to  attain  such  re- 
sults. We  cannot  reasonably  ask  that  truth  should 
be  attainable  in  the  careless  or  otherwise  incorrect 
exercise  of  our  mental  faculties.  And  yet  unreason- 
able as  it  is,  that  demand  is  sometimes  impiously  and 
audaciously  made  ;  and  not  a  few  have  turned  away 
in  disgust  from  the  study  of  the  Bible,  because  they 
could  not  arrive  at  satisfactory  conclusions,  without 
an  enlightened,  deliberate,  and  vigorous  exercise  of 
their  mental  faculties  on  the  communications  it  con- 
tains. 


CHAPTER  II. 
THE  RULES  OR  LAWS  OF  BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION. 

Sec.  1.  Language  considered  as  a  symbol   of 

THOUGHT. 

1.  Oral  Language  is  the  expression  of  our  ideas  by 
articulate  sounds,  which  are  used  as  the  signs  of 
those  ideas.  In  oral  language  a  single  sound,  or  a 
number  of  sounds  pronounced  continuously,  repre- 
sent a  single  idea.  Instead  of  having  a  different 
sound  to  represent  every  idea,  human  languages  have 
but  a  few  different  sounds,  and  represent  all  their 
numerous  and  diversified  ideas,  by  different  combi- 
nations of  these.  One  or  more  single  sounds  form 
a  word  ;  one  or  more  words  form  a  sentence  ;  one 
or  more  sentences  a  paragraph  or  discourse. 

2.  The  connexion  between  words  and  ideas  is  most- 
ly arbitrary  and  conventional.  Different  nations  use 
very  different  sounds  and  combinations  of  sound,  in 
the  communication  of  their  ideas.  It  is  in  this,  that 
the  diversity  of  human  languages  chiefly  consists. 
These  languages  are  made  up  in  part  of  different  el- 
ementary sounds ;  and  those  sounds  which  are  the 
same  in  all,  are  differently  combined  with  others  ; 
and  applied,  both  in  their  elementary  and  combined 

state,  to  denote  different  ideas  and  objects.    Those 

3* 


22  THE    RULES    OR   LAWS    OP 

sounds  that  are  naturally  expressive  of  the  idea* 
which  they  denote,  are  exceedingly  few,  and  com- 
paratively unimportant.  They  consist  mostly  of  in- 
terjections. Besides  these,  there  is  a  remote  corres- 
pondence between  many  combinations  of  sound  in 
every  language,  and  the  sense  which  they  convey, 
that  contributes  much  both  to  the  perspicuity  and 
force  of  language. 

3.  Written,  is  a  symbolical  representation  of  oral 
language,  and  of  ideas.  Its  object  is  first,  to  repre- 
sent oral  language  to  the  eye  ;  and  secondly,  to  re- 
present by  letters  lo  the  mind,  the  ideas  of  which 
oral  language  is  an  appropriate  vocal  symbol. 

A  syllable  in  writing,  which  consists  of  one  or 
more  letters,  corresponds  to  a  sound  in  speech,  and 
different  combinations  of  syllables,  to  different  com- 
binations of  sounds.  The  object  of  representing  ideas 
to  the  mind,  is  often  attained  through  the  medium 
of  letters,  when  the  sounds  are  not  represented  at  all. 
We  may  know  the  meaning  of  words,  that  we  do 
not  know  how  to  pronounce. 

The  deaf  and  dumb  are  taught  to  read,  but  they 
know  nothing  of  pronunciation,  or  of  any  articulate 
sounds  whatever.  Letters  are  not  to  them  the  marks 
of  sounds  at  all;  but  the  elements  or  component 
parts  of  written  words  merely,  and  those  words  the 
direct  representatives  of  ideas. 

Written  language  is  therefore  of  a  twofold  nature  : 
a  symbolical  representation  of  oral  language ;  and 
a  symbolical  representation  of  ideas.  Every  word 
written  represents  (1,)  a  word  spoken ;  (2,)  the  idea  of 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  23 

which  the  word  spoken  is  the  symbol.  Written  lan- 
guage is  as  much  the  symbol  of  ideas,  as  that  which 
is  spoken,  and  represents  them  as  directly  to  the 
mind.  The  correspondence  between  it  and  oral  lan- 
guage is  not  necessary  ;  for  we  might  speak  one  lan- 
guage and  write  another.  But  it  is  convenient ;  and 
in  consequence  of  its  convenience,  has  generally  pre- 
vailed. 

Written,  being  founded  upon  oral  language,  is 
constructed  on  the  same  principles,  and  corresponds 
to  it,  word  for  word,  and  syllable  for  sound.  It 
is  therefore  to  be  interpreted  by  the  same  rules. 
Whether  written  or  spoken,  it  is  a  symbolical  re- 
presentation of  thought,  and  substantially  the  same 
thing. 

4.  Speech  and  writing  have  each  their  peculiar  ad- 
vantages and  disadvantages,  as  symbolical  represen- 
tations of  thought.  The  words  may  be  the  same  ; 
but  in  writing,  they  are  permanent ;  in  speech,  tran- 
sient. A  written  communication  admits  of  a  more 
thorough  investigation  ;  a  spoken  one  produces  the 
deepest  immediate  impression. 

Repeated  perusal,  and  accurate  investigation  of 
the  force  of  words  and  phrases,  are  the  principal 
means  of  interpreting  a  written  discourse.  Tone,  em- 
phasis and  gesture  contribute  to  illustrate  and  ex- 
plain a  spoken  one.  Both  are  sufficiently  perspicu- 
ous to  the  attentive  and  diligent  inquirer.  Both  are 
too  obscure  to  be  correctly  understood  in  their  high- 
er applications,  by  the  inattentive  and  negligent. 

5.  Language  considered  as  a  product  of  the  human 


24  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

mind,  is  one  of  its  noblest  products.  It  is  not  the 
creation  of  an  individual,  or  of  an  hour;  but  it  is  the 
work  of  a  vast  multitude,  and  of  ages. 

It  is  a  vast  repository  of  thoughts  and  feelings, 
many  of  which  are  of  the  highest  order  and  of  the 
greatest  value.  It  is  a  repository  of  circulating 
thoughts,  and  the  medium  by  which  they  are  kept 
in  a  constant  state  of  progress  from  mind  to  mind, 
and  from  age  to  age. 

Not  the  least  interesting  of  the  properties  of  writ- 
ten language  is  that  whereby  it  is  furnished  with  in- 
ternal evidence  of  its  true  meaning.  Every  lan- 
guage is  its  own  interpreter,  and  almost  exclusively 
so,  to  those  who  are  acquainted  with  its  elements. 
The  right  interpretation  of  language,  generally  goes 
far  towards  proving  itself.  All  language  when  used 
with  intelligence  and  propriety,  has  a  true  meaning ; 
and  is  adapted  to  convey  that  meaning  to  all  who 
are  duly  acquainted  with  it. 

It  is  only  in  the  hands  of  the  ignorant  and  unskill- 
ful, that  this  medium  for  the  communication  of  know- 
ledge can  become  a  dead  and  unmeaning  combina- 
tion either  of  letters  or  sounds. 

Sec.  2.     The  interpretation  of  language, 
particularly  that  of  the  bible. 

1.  The  word  Interpret,  in  its  most  usual  sense 
signifies,  to  explain  the  meaning  of  words  to  one 
who  does  not  understand  them.  It  may  be  accom- 
plished either  by  expressing  the  sense  of  those  words 
by  others  that  are  better  understood  in  the  same 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  25 

language,  or  by  translating  them  into  a  different  lan- 
guage. 

Interpretation  properly  means  the  act  of  interpret- 
ing. Both  imply  an  understanding  of  what  is  to  be 
explained.  The  theory  or  science  of  Interpretation 
is,  properly  speaking,  the  theory  or  science  of  lan- 
guage, considered  as  a  medium  for  the  communica- 
tion of  ideas.  It  embraces  the  principles  and  rules, 
according  to  which,  language  is  constructed  ;  and  by 
which  it  is  to  be  understood  and  explained. 

Were  there  no  fixed  principles  of  language,  there 
could  be  no  certain  rules  of  Interpretation.  Were 
these  principles  incapable  of  being  accurately  deter- 
mined, the  rules  of  Interpretation  would  be  equally 
incapable  of  development. 

But  language  has  of  necessity  fixed  principles  of 
construction,  that  are  capable  of  being  perfectly  as- 
certained ;  and  these,  and  these  only  constitute  the 
basis  of  an  intelligent  and  intelligible  use  of  it.  By 
these  only  is  it  rendered  significant  of  ideas,  and  by 
these  only,  can  it  be  understood  or  explained. 

2.  All  language  however,  is  not  equally  perfect  in 
its  construction,  and  even  when  perfect  is  not  equally 
perspicuous.  Some  important  and  correct  combina- 
tions of  words,  are  of  more  difficult  interpretation 
than  others;  either  from  the  nature  of  the  subjects; 
from  the  infrequent  use  of  some  one  or  more  of 
the  words  which  they  contain  ;  from  complexity  of 
construction  ;  or  from  other  causes. 

If  the  words  of  which  a  discourse  consists,  sustain 
in  their  different  positions  in  respect  to  each  other, 
a  known  relation  to  any  principle  or  rule  of  Inter- 


26  THE   RULES    OR    LAWS   OF 

pretation,  their  meaning  can  be  determined  by  the 
application  of  that  rule.  If  not,  their  meaning  can 
not  be  determined  by  any  means  whatever.  Such 
cases  sometimes  occur  in  human  productions.  But 
their  occurrence  is  seldom,  and  particularly  so  in 
respect  to  the  Bible. 

3.  Cases  are  more  frequent  in  which  the  relation  of 
some  word  or  phrase  to  a  known  rule  of  Interpre- 
tation is  not  wholly  unknown,  but  indefinite  and  am- 
biguous. When  this  occurs  we  may  approximate 
to  a  definite  and  precise  interpretation,  but  can  ne- 
ver attain  it.  Ambiguous  symbols  can  never  give  a 
determinate  sense.  It  is  not  the  legitimate  province 
of  interpretation  to  put  upon  language  a  sense  any 
more  determinate,  than  it  really  conveys.  That 
which  is  precise  and  definite,  ought  to  be  interpreted 
in  a  precise  and  definite  manner.  That  which  is  in- 
definite and  ambiguous,  ought  to  be  interpreted  as 
such.  Where  different  meanings  are  possible,  and 
we  are  not  in  possession  of  any  known  or  ascertain- 
able relation  whereby  to  determine  which  is  intend- 
ed, we  ought  not  to  assume  the  responsibility  of  de- 
ciding. Our  decision  in  such  a  case  must  of  course 
be  arbitrary  and  conjectural.  It  can  make  no  part 
of  our  certain  knowledge,  and  therefore  can  be  of 
no  real  use  to  us. 

The  utmost  that  the  interpreter  can  do,  is  to  as- 
certain and  apply  the  appropriate  rules  of  Interpre- 
tation ;  determine  the  true  result ;  and  report  it  ac- 
curately. In  the  performance  of  this  work  there  is 
a  wide  field  for  the  exercise  of  skill  and  diligence. 

4.  The  rules  of  Interpretation  are  numerous.    The 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  27 

relations  by  which  the  meaning  of  words  are  indica- 
ted, are  of  great  variety  and  extent.  To  understand 
all  those  rules  and  relations,  is  a  matter  which  re- 
quires patient  investigation  and  extensive  research. 
This  is  particularly  the  case  in  reference  to  the  Bi- 
ble. The  lowest  degree  of  information  may  be  suf- 
ficient for  the  right  understanding  of  some  parts  of  it ; 
but  the  field  which  it  opens  in  this  department  of 
study,  is  almost  immeasurable. 

The  most  obvious  of  the  rules  of  Interpretation, 
are  those  which  are  of  the  most  extensive  applica- 
tion, and  of  the  greatest  importance.  But  they  do 
not  comprehend  the  whole ;  neither  are  they  suffi- 
cient for  the  right  and  certain  direction  of  our  judg- 
ments in  every  case  ;  far  from  it.  Sometimes  the 
meaning  of  a  word  is  indicated  by  one  relation  and 
one  rule,  and  sometimes  by  another  ;  sometimes  by 
a  rule  of  common  and  easy  application,  such  as  is 
obvious  to  every  eye,  and  easy  to  every  mind ;  and 
sometimes  by  one  that  is  of  an  opposite  character  in 
these  respects  ;  such  as  presents  itself  only  to  the 
eye  of  discriminating  and  improved  judgment ;  and 
such  as  minute  attention  and  perseverance  alone  can 
supply  or  improve. 

5.  In  most  cases  the  meaning  of  words  is  not  indi- 
cated by  a  single  rule,  but  by  several ;  each  inde- 
pendent and  decisive.  The  application  of  any  one 
however,  that  it  is  clear  and  unambiguous,  is  suffi- 
cient. In  cases  of  the  joint  application  of  several, 
they  mutually  confirm  the  result  in  which  they  agree. 

6.  A  knowledge  of  the  theory  of  Interpretation  is  co- 
extensive with  that  of  the  theory  of  language,  con- 


28  THE   RULES   OR    LAWS   OF 

sidered  as  a  medium  for  the  communication  of 
thought.  Some  degree  of  it  is  universal.  The  per- 
fection of  it  is  exceedingly  rare. 

.The  art  of  expressing  our  ideas  by  the  use  of 
words,  and  of  interpreting  correctly  the  expressions 
of  others,  is  one,  to  the  attainment  of  which,  the  ear- 
liest efforts  of  the  human  mind  are  universally  di- 
rected. The  first  lessons  of  childhood  have  refer- 
ence to  this  attainment ;  and  our  first  valuable  acqui- 
sitions of  knowledge  relate  to  the  meaning  and  use 
of  words.  All  prosecute  this  attainment  in  some 
way,  and  to  some  extent  in  subsequent  life,  although 
few  do  it  systematically  and  thoroughly.  Many  un- 
derstand Interpretation  as  an  art,  who  know  little  of 
it  as  a  demonstrative  science,  comprehending  a  com- 
plete system  of  established  principles  and  rules. 

A  scientific  knowledge  of  this  branch  of  learning 
is  important  to  all  reading  men  ;  and  particularly  so 
in  respect  to  the  two  greatest  departments  of  human 
knowledge,  Law  and  Religion.  The  extent  and  va- 
riety of  matter  comprehended  under  these  titles,  the 
precision  and  accuracy  of  their  developments  of 
principle,  and  the  nice  discriminations  both  of  prin- 
ciple and  character,  with  which  they  abound,  render 
an  accurate  and  comprehensive  knowledge  of  the 
laws  of  Interpretation  of  the  highest  consequence  to 
the  interpreter  of  either.  Every  man  therefore,  who 
wishes  to  be  his  own  interpreter  of  the  Bible,  ought 
to  acquaint  himself  thoroughly  with  these  laws. 

7.  The  laws  of  Interpretation  are  general  and  par- 
ticular. Its  general  laws  are  such  as  are  founded 
in  the  nature  or  language  generally,  and  are  conse- 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  29 

quently  of  universal  application.  They  apply  equal- 
ly to  prose  and  poetry,  to  expositions  of  religion  and 
of  law,  to  those  which  are  inspired  and  uninspired. 

Its  particular  laws  are  founded  on  the  pecul- 
iar properties  of  the  communication  to  which  they 
relate  ;  and  serve  to  modify,  but  not  to  suspend  or 
supercede  those  which  are  general. 

All  the  laws  of  interpretation,  both  general  and 
particular,  must  either  be  self  evident,  or  capable  of 
satisfactory  and  decisive  proof.  As  far  as  they  are 
known,  they  serve  as  indications  of  the  meaning  of 
words,  sentences  and  discourses,  in  all  the  cases  to 
which  they  apply.  Beyond  the  extent  to  which  they 
apply,  we  have  no  means  of  knowledge  on  this  sub- 
ject. 

The  Bible  embraces  every  diversity  of  style  and 
composition,  and  therefore  requires  a  most  extensive 
acquaintance  with  the  laws  of  interpretation,  in  or- 
der to  its  being  rightly  interpreted. 

It  has  both  in  respect  to  its  character  as  a  whole, 
and  in  respect  to  several  of  its  parts,  many  striking 
peculiarities,  that  essentially  modify  its  meaning,  and 
distinguish  it  from  all  other  works.  It  cannot  be  in- 
terpreted and  interpreted  aright,  except  by  the  ap- 
plication of  all  those  general  and  particular  laws  of 
Interpretation  which  legitimately  apply  to  the  expo- 
sition of  it- 

A  statement  and  illustration  of  these  general  and 
particular  laws  of  Interpretation,  as  far  as  they  are 
necessary  to  a  right  understanding  and  exposition  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  is  the  appropriate  object  of 
Biblical  Interpretation,  considered  as  a  science.  That 
4 


30  THE    RULES    OR    LAWS   OF 

object  it  is  the  design  of  the  author,  humbly  and 
faithfully  to  prosecute  in  the  following  pages. 

Sec.   3.     Words   considered  as  the  elements 

OF    LANGUAGE. 

1.  Words,  so  far  as  the  indications  of  thought  are 
concerned,  are  the  elements  of  language.  They 
consist  of  one  or  more  syllables  or  sounds,  which  are 
used  by  common  consent  as  signs  of  our  ideas. 

The  general  properties  of  words  considered  as  el- 
ementary parts  of  language,  fall  within  the  province 
of  the  grammarian.  The  same  is  true  in  regard  to 
their  mutual  relations.  Both  however,  ought  to  be 
well  understood  by  the  interpreter.  Such  know- 
ledge is  requisite  in  order  that  we  may  appreciate 
their  relative  importance ;  and  also  to  indicate  with 
accuracy  and  precision,  their  mutual  influence  in 
modifying  the  meaning  of  each  other. 

A  sentence  is  a  combination  of  words  expressing 
a  complete  sense.  Every  sentence  must  contain  a 
subject  or  thing  spoken  of;  and  an  attribute  or  thing 
affirmed  or  denied  of  that  subject.  A  sentence  con- 
taining one  member  only,  is  simple  ;  one  containing 
two  or  more  members,  is  complex.  A  combination 
of  sentences  constitutes  a  paragraph,  and  a  combina- 
tions of  paragraphs,  a  discourse. 

A  sentence,  paragraph,  or  discourse,  is  a  complex 
symbol  of  thought,  that  can  be  understood  only  by 
an  investigation  of  its  elements,  in  the  particular 
combination  in  which  they  occur.  Those  elements 
are  words  mutually  connected  by  the  various  ties  of 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  31 

grammatical  association,  and  relationship.  The  in- 
terpretation of  language,  therefore,  is  but  the  inter- 
pretation of  words  which  compose  it,  standing  as 
they  do,  in  the  various  relations  which  they  sustain, 
as  its  component  parts. 

2.  The  elements  of  things  are  apt  to  be  overlooked, 
or  superficially  examined.  This  is  true  in  respect  to 
words,  the  elements  of  language.  We  do  not  read- 
ily perceive  the  numerous  and  important  agencies  of 
a  single  word  in  facilitating  the  communication  of 
thought.  We  often  allow  delicate  and  interesting 
shades  of  meaning  to  pass  unnoticed,  and  thus  fail 
of  receiving  the  full  impression  of  what  is  expressed. 

The  first  step  in  the  business  of  interpretation  is 
to  ascertain  the  meaning  of  single  words.  The  ex- 
planation of  words  is  prerequisite  to  the  explana- 
tion of  sentences  and  discourses.  Every  word  that 
enters  into  the  texture  of  a  sentence  or  paragraph, 
ought  to  be  accurately  investigated  and  understood. 

A  general  and  vague  impression  in  respect  to  the 
meaning  of  words  is  not  sufficient.  Our  knowledge 
on  this  subject,  ought  to  be  certain  and  accurate.  An 
erroneous  impression  in  respect  to  the  meaning  of  a 
single  word,  always  obscures,  more  or  less,  the 
meaning  of  the  sentence  to  which  it  belongs,  and  not 
unfrequently  that  of  whole  paragraphs  and  dis- 
courses. 

3.  The  office  of  words,  in  their  being  made  the  me- 
dium of  Divine  communication  to  man,  is  immensely 
important.  The  words  of  the  Bible  rightly  interpret- 
ed, express  the  sublime  doctrines  of  religion  and  mo- 


32  THE    RULES    OR    LAWS    OF 

rality.  Rightly  interpreted,  they  teach  that  wisdom 
which  is  from  above,  and  are  able  to  make  us  wise 
unto  salvation.  Any  considerable  mistake  in  regard 
to  their  true  meaning,  is  liable  to  prove  fatal  ;  and 
will  certainly  be  injurious. 

Negligence  in  ascertaining  the  meaning  of  words, 
is  the  cause  of  many  pernicious  errors,  and  is  itself 
highly  pernicious  and  criminal.  Multitudes  are  guilty 
of  it,  in  respect  to  the  Bible,  even  to  a  greater  de- 
gree than  they  are  in  respect  to  other  important  doc- 
uments, which  it  concerns  them  rightly  to  under- 
stand. 

It  concerns  every  man  to  understand  the  Bible, 
and  to  avoid  perverting,  in  any  instance,  its  divine 
communications.  But  there  are  multitudes  who 
voluntarily  and  presumptuously  neglect  their  duty, 
and  act  contrary  to  their  true  interest,  in  relation  to 
this  matter. 

Sec.  4.     General  principles  relating  to  the 
meaning  of  single  words. 

The  general  principles  relating  to  the  meaning  of 
single  words,  are  simple  but  important.  They  ought 
to  be  clearly  perceived  and  constantly  borne  in  mind 
while  engaged  in  the  Interpretation  of  the  Sacred 
writings.  They  are  among  the  most  elementary 
and  fundamental  principles  of  human  language. 

1.  Every  word  has  some  meaning,  either  of  itself 
or  else  as  qualifying  the  meaning  of  other  words,  or 
exhibiting  their  mutual  relations  and  dependences. 
Nouns  denote  the  names  of  things,  verbs  express 
some  action,  being,  or  state  of  being;  articles,  adjec- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  33 

tives,  and  adverbs  qualify  the  meaning  of  nouns, 
verbs,  &,c.  ;  conjunctions  and  prepositions  exhibit 
the  connection  and  relation  of  words,  phrases,  and 
sentences. 

Nouns  are  the  only  class  of  words,  out  of  the  nine 
of  which  languages  generally  consist,  that  are  the 
names  of  things  ;  and  consequently  nouns  and  pro- 
nouns are  the  only  classes  of  words  that  are  used  to 
denote  objects  of  thought,  or  subjects  of  discourse. 
Verbs  are  indispensable  to  the  expression  of  action, 
being,  or  a  state  of  being.  But  the  other  classes  of 
words  are  as  truly  significant  as  these.  They  have 
their  appropriate  orifices  in  facilitating  the  communi- 
cation of  ideas,  each  of  which  is  essential  to  the  per- 
fection of  language.  The  communication  of  ideas 
through  this  medium,  is  effected  by  the  joint  signifl- 
cancy  and  force  of  all  the  different  classes  of  words, 
each  performing  its  particular  part,  according  to  its 
nature  and  position,  in  the  accomplishment  of  this 
object.  The  noun  cannot  say  to  the  adjective  and 
preposition,  1  have  no  need  of  you  ;  nor  the  adjec- 
tive or  preposition  to  the  noun,  we  have  no  need  of 
thee  ;  for  all  are  necessary  to  one  another,  in  order  to 
their  accomplishing  the  high  purposes  (o  which  they 
are  respectively  devoted,  and  in  which  they  have  a 
mutual  participation. 

The  assertion  that  every  word  has  some  meaning, 
is  true  of  language  generally  ;  but  it  is  emphatically 
true  of  the  Bible.  A  word  that  has  no  meaning,  is 
of  course,  useless.  It  can  do  no  good.  Such  words, 
if  there  were  any,  would  be  an  incumbrance  to  any 
work  in  which  they  might  be  found.     They  would 


4 


34  THE   RULES    OR   LAWS   OF 

be  an  incumbrance  to  the  Bible,  occupying  space  in 
its  pages,  and  diverting  the  attention  of  its  readers  to 
no  good  purpose.  Indeed  they  would  be  an  anom- 
aly which  it  would  be  difficult  satisfactorily  to  ac- 
count for. 

2.  Most  words  have  more  than  one  meaning.  Any 
person  who  has  not  observed  this  fact,  will  be  readi- 
ly convinced  of  it  by  turning  over  the  pages  of  a  dic- 
tionary, and  noticing  the  various  definitions  almost 
universally  assigned  to  words  in  common  use.  The 
fact  moreover,  is  abundantly  verified  in  the  observa- 
tion and  experience  of  every  intelligent  person. 

Thus  the  word  heat  denotes,  (1,)  caloric,  a  sub- 
stance which  exists  in  the  natural  world,  and  enters 
into  the  composition  of  natural  bodies. 

(2.)  The  sensation  produced  when  an  additional 
or  unusual  quantity  of  this  substance  passes  into  any 
part  of  the  human  body. 

(3.)  Animal  excitement,  impassioned  feeling. 

These  significations,  it  will  be  observed,  are  en- 
tirely different  from  each  other,  and  yet  they  are  all 
among  the  established  and  common  meanings  of  a 
single  word,  and  that  a  word  in  common  and  con- 
stant use. 

So  the  word,  spirit,  denotes,  (1.)  wind,  breath. 

(2.)  Animal  excitement,  ardor  ;  as  when  we  say 
of  soldiers,  they  fought  with  great  spirit. 

(3.)  The  soul  of  man,  or  of  some  other  sentient  be- 
ing ;  an  incorporeal,  thinking  subsistence,  such  as 
inhabits  and  actuates  the  human  body  ;  as  when 
we  speak  of  the  spirit  of  man  going  upward,  at 
death,  and  the  spirit  of  a  beast  going  downward  to 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  35 

the  earth  ;  and  when  we  speak  of  God  and  angels, 
as  being  spirits. 

(4.)  The  Holy  Spirit.  The  third  person  of  the 
adorable  Trinity. 

(5.)  Temper,  disposition ;  as  when  we  say  of  a 
man,  that  he  showed  a  good  spirit,  or  a  bad  spirit ; 
meaning,  evidently,  that  he  showed  a  good  or  bad 
disposition  or  temper.  Several  other  definitions  of 
this  word  might  be  given,  but  these  are  sufficient  to 
illustrate  the  principle  under  consideration. 

Plurality  of  meanings  belonging  to  the  same  word, 
are  characteristic  of  all  languages,  both  ancient  and 
modern. 

These  meanings  may  be  entirely  different  and  un- 
connected by  any  intimate  relation,  as  is  strikingly 
the  case  with  the  verb,  let,  meaning  both  to  permit 
and  to  hinder ;  or  as  is  more  usually  the  case,  the 
different  meanings  of  the  same  word  may,  many  or 
all  of  them,  sustain  some  general  relation  to  each 
other,  such  as  similarity,  either  of  nature  or  effect ; 
relation  of  the  cause  to  the  effect,  or  of  the  effect  to 
the  cause  ;  of  contiguity,  &c.  In  many  cases,  how- 
ever, the  several  different  meanings  of  a  word  are 
only  different  modifications  of  the  same  general  idea, 
and  yet  modifications  of  that  idea,  so  distinct  and 
different,  that  one  cannot  be  substituted  for  another, 
without  introducing  the  utmost  confusion,  and  lead- 
ing to  most  palpable  errors. 

The  fact  that  many  words  have  different  mean- 
ings, all  of  undoubted  authority,  deserves  to  be  par- 
ticularly considered.  Obvious  as  this  fact  is,  it  is 
sometimes  forgotten,  to  the  greatest  detriment  of  the 


36  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

cause  of  truth.  Having  ascertained  that  a  particu- 
lar word  in  some  connexions  and  in  relation  to  some 
subjects,  has  a  particular  meaning,  many  understand 
it  in  the  same  sense  in  connexions,  and  in  relation  to 
subjects  entirely  different,  without  a  moments  inqui- 
ry or  hesitation. 

They  regard  the  fact  of  its  meaning  one  thing,  in 
one  case,  satisfactory  evidence,  that  it  has  the  same 
meaning  in  a  case  entirely  different.  That  fact,  how- 
ever, is  no  proof  at  all  of  the  supposition  founded 
upon  it.  That  the  same  word  may  have  different 
meanings,  is  one  of  the  clearest  and  most  obvious 
truths  in  this,  or  any  other  science  ;  and  if  so,  such 
words  must  have  one  meaning  in  one  connexion, 
and  a  different  meaning  in  other  and  different  ones. 

We  might  conceive  of  a  language  so  copious  that 
no  single  word  in  it  should  have  two  or  more  mean- 
ings. But  it  would  be  a  mere  conception.  The  re- 
ality has  never  been  attained.  Neither  is  it  practi- 
cable to  attain  it.  The  plan  which  has  been  univer- 
sally adopted,  is  altogether  preferable  to  this  imagin- 
ary one,  in  being  at  once  sufficiently  perspicuous, 
and  much  easier  of  acquisition  than  the  other,  even 
if  it  were  carried  into  effect,  could  possibly  be. 

Language  being  constituted  as  it  is,  every  inter- 
preter of  the  Bible  ought  to  familiarize  himself  with 
the  different  meanings  of  wTords  ;  and  especially 
should  he  do  this,  in  respect  to  those  which  are  par- 
ticularly important,  on  occount  of  their  being  en- 
trusted with  the  conveyance  of  the  great  doctrines 
of  revealed  religion.  Without  this  extensive  know- 
ledge of  the  different  meanings  of  words,  we  shall 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  37 

be  in  danger  of  applying  to  the  explanation  of  them, 
the  meaning  or  meanings  we  are  familiar  with,  when 
a  different,  and  to  us,  unknown  one,  is  intended  and 
indicated. 

3.  Words  cannot  have  a  plurality  of  significations 
at  the  same  time  and  in  a  given  position.  They 
may  be  repeated  in  different  senses  even  in  the  same 
sentence  ;  but  each  single  use  of  them  will  be  in  a 
single  sense.  We  have  a  striking  illustration  of  this 
in  Matt.  x.  39  ;  where  our  Savior  makes  the  follow- 
ing declaration  :  "  He  that  findeth  his  life  shall  lose 
it,  and  he  that  loseth  his  life  for  my  sake,  shall  find 
it."  Here  twice  in  the  same  sentence  is  the  word 
life,  and  its  equivalent,  the  pronoun  it,  used  in  two 
different  senses.  It  denotes  (1.)  temporal  life;  and 
(2.)  spiritual  and  eternal  life  ;  and  in  the  subsequent 
clause,  it  is  repeated  in  the  same  senses.  In  neither 
case  does  this  word  have  two  meanings  ;  nor  does 
its  single  meaning,  in  either  case,  comprehend  that 
which  it  has  in  the  other. 

As  a  further  illustration  of  the  fact  that  words  do 
not  possess  a  plurality  of  meanings  in  single  instan- 
ces of  the  use  of  them,  we  may  refer  to  John  iv.  24. 
"  God  is  a  spirit."  The  word  spirit  has  different  es- 
tablished meanings,  some  of  which  we  have  already 
noticed.  The  question  however  now  is,  not  what  it 
means  in  other  positions,  but  what  it  means  here; 
and  whether  it  has  but  one  meaning,  or  more.  Does 
it  mean  breath  ?  No.  Does  it  mean  animal  excite- 
ment? No.  Does  it  mean  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  dis- 
tinction from  the  other  persons  of  the  Trinity  ?  No. 
Does  it  mean  temper  or  disposition  ?  No.    It  has  not 


38  THE    RULES    OR    LAWS    OF 

one  of  these  meanings,  any  more  than  it  has  the 
meaning  or  meanings  of  an  entirely  different  word. 
Does  it  mean  that  God  is  an  incorporeal,  sentient, 
thinking,  or  in  other  words,  spiritual  being;  the  op- 
posite of  sensual  ?  This  is  obviously  its  true  and  on- 
ly meaning  in  the  present  case.  In  this  sense,  one 
of  the  established  senses  of  this  word,  it  is  here  used, 
and  not  in  either  of  the  others.  The  other  meanings 
of -this  word,  though  many  of  them  frequent  and  ob- 
vious in  other  connexions,  are  inadmissible  here. 
The  attempt  to  introduce  them  would  produce  con- 
fusion and  difficulty,  rather  than  increase  the  real 
and  instructive  significancy  of  the  passage. 

In  the  figurative  use  of  words,  there  is  no  real  de- 
viation from  the  principle  of  single  senses.  Words 
have  not  a  figurative  and  literal  signification  at  the 
same  time.  The  moment  any  word  receives  a  figu- 
rative sense,  its  literal  one  is  entirely  superseded. 
For  example,  in  the  expressions,  fiery  indignation, 
melting  tenderness,  burning  love  ;  the  words  fiery, 
melting,  and  burning,  do  not  denote  those  natural 
changes  which  in  their  literal  senses  they  always 
signify;  but  simply  qualities  of  the  several  subjects 
to  which  in  these  phrases,  they  are  applied ;  quali- 
ties at  once  immaterial  and  invisible. 

So  in  the  sentence,  God  is  a  sun  and  a  shield  to 
those  who  walk  uprightly.  The  words  sun  and 
shield  are  not  used  to  denote  the  natural  objects  of 
which  they  are  the  appropriate  names,  but  to  repre- 
sent the  Almighty  in  his  peculiar  relations  to  the  pi- 
ous, as  their  benefactor  and  protector.  This  tropical 
or  figurative  representation,  is  made  by  an  allusion 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  39 

to  the  usual  and  literal  signification  of  the  words  so 
used  ;  and  there  is  in  such  cases  an  implied  compar- 
ison between  the  object,  being,  or  action,  usually  in- 
dicated by  such  words,  and  those  which  they  figura- 
tively represent. 

The  same  is  true  in  respect  to  the  allegory.  The 
words  which  constitute  an  allegory,  are  used  in  a 
single  sense,  as  truly  as  those  which  constitute  any 
other  class  of  narratives.  The  signification  of  an  al- 
legory, as  such,  is  not  in  single  words  ;  but  in  the 
objects  and  relations  which  those  words  indicate,  be- 
ing applied  collectively  to  denote  different  and  anal- 
ogous ones. 

The  use  of  words  to  express  a  plurality  of  senses 
at  the  same  time,  would  be  contrary  to  the  general 
practice  of  mankind,  except  in  the  case  of  enigmas, 
the  design  of  which  is  not  to  instruct  but  to  puzzle. 

Historians,  philosophers,  moralists,  and  poets, 
use  words  invariably  in  single  senses.  No  reader 
of  history,  philosophy,  ethics,  or  poetry,  thinks  of 
putting  a  double  or  treble  sense  upon  the  words  of 
authors,  in  those  different  departments  of  literature. 
The  interpreter  who  should  endeavor  to  do  this, 
would  excite  general  disgust  and  derision. 

The  correctness  of  the  principle  now  under  con- 
sideration, may  be  established  by  an  appeal  to  every 
man's  observation  and  experience.  How  are  we 
accustomed  to  use  words  ourselves  ?  How  are  oth- 
ers of  our  acquaintance  accustomed  to  use  them? 
In  a  single,  or  plurality  of  senses  ?  In  single  senses, 
undoubtedly  and  universally.  An  exception  besides 
that  of  enigmas,  cannot  be  found.     How  do  all  the 


40  THE   RULES   OR   LA.WS   OF 

English  historians,  scholars,  poets,  and  ministers  of 
the  gospel  use  words?  In  single,  or  plurality  of  sen- 
ses ?  In  single  senses,  most  certainly  and  without  ex- 
ception. How  do  other  modern  and  ancient  nations 
use  words  in  this  respect?  Uniformly  in  single  sen- 
ses. There  is  no  exception  in  ancient  or  modern 
times,  unless  it  is  found  in  the  Bible.  Is  there  any 
exception  to  this  rule  in  the  Bible  ?  Is  there  any  in 
the  Bible  history  ?  No.  Is  there  any  in  the  precept- 
ive parts  of  the  Bible  ?  No.  Is  there  any  in  the  an- 
nouncement and  exposition  of  its  doctrines  ?  Not 
any.  So  far  there  is  no  difference  of  opinion  among 
the  great  body  of  intelligent  and  candid  interpreters. 
To  the  questions  here  propounded  they  all  answer 
no. 

If  there  are  cases  in  the  Bible  in  which  words  are 
used  in  a  plurality  of  senses,  they  are  not  sufficiently 
numerous  to  make  that  usage  the  general  rule,  even 
for  the  Bible.  P'or  in  its  history,  in  its  preceptive 
communications,  and  in  its  announcements  of  doc- 
trine, this  usage  does  not  obtain  ;  and  these  compre- 
hend altogether  the  greater  part  of  the  Sacred  vol- 
ume. 

So  general  is  the  rule  both  in  the  inspired  and  in 
uninspired  writings,  that  the  contrary  can  never  be 
admitted  without  specific  and  decisive  evidence  in  its 
favor.  And  then  if  admitted  at  all,  it  must  be  as  an 
exception,  not  as  a  rule. 

Not  only  is  this  rule  general.  It  is  important  and 
necessary  to  the  clearness  and  certainty  of  language. 
Any  deviation  from  it,  in  the  intercourse  of  society, 
or  in  any  department  of  the  literature  of  the  world, 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  41 

would  be  attended  with  most  serious  disadvantages. 
We  should  be  obliged  in  using  language  constructed 
on  this  principle  of  manifold  senses  ;  or  in  reading 
such  language  intelligently,  as  used  by  others,  to  keep 
along  two  or  more  distinct  trains  of  thought  in  our 
minds,  according  to  the  number  of  significations  our 
words  possessed.  But  this  we  could  never  do. 
Words  used  in  single  senses  have  meaning  enough, 
when  rightly  arranged,  to  occupy  our  most  fixed  and 
our  entire  attention.  Had  they  ten  thousand  mean- 
ings more,  those  meanings  would  be  superfluous. 
One  sense  is  enough  for  a  word  in  one  place,  in  or- 
der to  its  fulfilling,  in  the  most  perfect  manner,  the 
conditions  which  the  highest  perfection  of  human 
language  requires. 

A  language  constructed  on  the  principle  of  mani- 
fold senses,  however  it  might  suit  the  capacities  of 
other  conceivable  beings,  would  be  unfit  for  the  use 
of  men.  It  would  be  perfectly  unwieldly  to  our  lim- 
ited faculties.  We  could  not  use  it  at  all ;  or  at 
least,  not  to  advantage.  The  use  of  it  would  require 
the  exercise  of  more  intellect  than  we  have  to  ex- 
pend, and  of  a  higher  nature  than  God  has  given  us. 

4.  The  usual  and  established  meaning  of  words  is 
variable.  It  is  different  in  respect  to  many  words,  at 
different  periods  in  the  history  of  the  same  language. 
A  particular  signification  may  be  given  a  word  at 
one  period,  on  the  ground  of  general  usage,  that  can- 
not at  another,  either  later  or  earlier.  No  one  can 
read  a  page  of  the  older  English  writers  without 
finding  instances  of  this  fact. 

Words  are  permanent  symbols  of  thought,  but 


42  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

having  no  natural  and  necessary  connexion  between 
them  and  the  ideas  they  are  used  to  express,  they 
are  necessarily  liable  to  a  change  in  respect  to  usage^ 
A  language  in  common  use  is  constantly  fluctuating 
in  respect  to  the  meaning  of  some  of  its  words.  It 
is  never  exactly  stationary,  and  cannot  be. 

Some  words  are  constantly  assuming  new  signifi- 
cations, and  some  are  constantly  laying  aside  old 
and  established  ones.  Some  are  becoming  more 
definite  and  limited  in  their  signification,  and  some 
more  general  and  indefinite. 

These  changes,  though  constantly  going  on,  occuf 
by  a  process  so  gradual  and  imperceptible,  as  to  be 
hardly  noticed.  We  seldom  observe  the  process  in 
respect  to  a  particular  word,  until  it  is  nearly  com- 
pleted ;  but  we  are  often  compelled  to  acknowledge 
it  when  done. 

A  knowledge  of  the  variation  in  the  meaning  of 
many  words,  in  different  chronological  periods,  is 
particularly  important  to  the  student  of  the  English 
Bible.  This  Bible  is  one  of  the  noblest  specimens  of 
the  English  language,  and  one  of  its  most  ample  re- 
positories of  standard  literature.  It  comes  clown  to 
us,  venerable  with  the  weight  of  years,  as  well  as 
with  the  dignity  of  Divinely  inspired  truth.  Its  age 
however,  increases  in  some  respects,  the  difficulties 
of  its  interpretation.  This  is  not  the  fact  in  regard 
to  its  general  texture,  but  it  is  obviously  so  in  re- 
spect to  many  single  words ;  and  that  it  is  so,  is  by 
no  means  strange,  considering  how  greatly  the  lan- 
guage in  common  use,  differs  from  that  of  1611,  the 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  43 

period  when  our  common  English  Bible  was  first 
published. 

The  cause  of  wonder  in  respect  to  this  subject  is, 
not  that  so  great  and  general  a  variation  has  taken 
place,  in  regard  to  the  usual  meaning  of  those  words 
which  the  Bible  contains,  but  that  the  instances  of 
this  kind  are  comparatively  so  few  and  so  unimport- 
ant; that  amid  the  manifest  and  numerous  changes 
of  so  many  years,  so  little  obscurity  has  been  cast 
over  the  sacred  volume  by  these  changes.  These 
variations,  however,  though  unimportant  in  respect 
to  the  great  mass  of  the  sacred  writings,  are  not  so 
in  themselves,  or  in  respect  to  the  particular  words 
to  which  they  relate,  and  the  particular  passages  in 
which  they  occur. 

5.  The  true  meaning  of  words  when  correctly  and 
judiciously  used,  is  always  capable  of  being  ascer- 
tained by  a  due  consideration  of  existing  evidence. 
A  writer  who  introduces  words  into  his  discourse 
which  are  not  capable  of  being  correctly  explained 
by  a  recurrence  to  existing  evidence,  and  who  does 
not  himself,  in  some  way,  indicate  unequivocally 
their  true  meaning,  violates  one  of  the  fundamental 
laws  of  language. 

In  determining  the  meaning  of  words,  therefore, 
we  are  always  authorized  to  proceed  on  the  assump- 
tion, that  indications  of  their  true  sense  exist  some- 
where, unless  they  have  been  lost.  Such  indications 
must  have  existed  either  external  to  the  particular 
discourse  in  which  any  word  in  question  occurs,  or 
else  within  it.  They  are  therefore  to  be  sought  both 
externally  and  internally. 


I 

44  THE    RULE8   OR   LAWS    OF 

6.  Many  words  are  capable  of  being  used  in  ar- 
bitrary senses,  different  from  any  that  appropriately 
belong  to  them,  which  are  generally  termed  their 
tropical  or  figurative  meanings.  The  words  so  used 
are  denominated  tropes,  or  figures  of  speech.  Any 
word  is  made  a  trope  or  figure  of  speech,  by  being 
used  in  a  tropical  or  figurative  sense.  When  this 
tropical  sense  becomes  a  common  one,  as  is  some- 
times the  case,  the  word  ceases  to  be  a  trope,  though 
expressing  a  sense  which  was  once  tropical. 

The  tropical  significations  of  words  are  numerous 
and  various.  They  are  capable  of  being  multiplied 
and  varied  to  an  indefinite  extent ;  and  when  used 
with  propriety,  are  also  as  capable  of  being  ascer- 
tained with  accuracy  as  any  other  meanings  of  which 
words  are  susceptible.  Whatever  ideas  they  are  in- 
telligently and  correctly  used  to  express,  they  are 
capable  of  expressing.  If  the  ideas  they  are  used  to 
express  are  well  defined,  they  will  express  them  as 
such  ;  if  vague  and  indefinite,  they  will  of  course, 
make  a  corresponding  indefinite  impression.  Lan- 
guage cannot  legitimately  convey  what  was  never 
committed  to  it.  The  ideas  it  communicates,  must 
be  no  other  than  those  it  has  received.  Such  as  it 
receives,  such  it  gives  to  all  who  are  capable  of  ap- 
preciating its  unambiguous  signs.  This  is  as  true  of 
tropical  or  figurative  language,  as  of  that  which  is 
most  strictly  literal. 

In  all  tropical  expressions,  the  literal  meaning  of 
the  tropical  word  is  an  index  to  its  tropical  sense. 
A  knowledge  of  its  literal  meaning  is  necessary  in 
order  to  our  understanding  its  tropical  one,  but  does 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  45 

not  constitute  any  part  of  it.  Its  tropical  meaning 
is  one  distinct  and  peculiar,  over  and  above  its  ordi- 
nary one,  though  in  part  indicated  by  it. 

The  tropical  or  figurative  use  of  words  is  almost 
universal.  In  admitting  of  this  arbitrary  designation 
to  express  ideas  and  qualities  entirely  different  from 
any  which  belong  to  their  established  significations, 
the  variety,  extent,  power,  and  beauty  of  language 
are  increased  beyond  what  could  otherwise  be  at- 
tained. 

The  literal  meanings  of  words  are  fixed  by  mutu- 
al agreement  and  custom.  We  are  obliged  to  take 
them  as  they  are.  Their  figurative  meanings,  how- 
ever are  matters  of  individual  fabrication.  We  may 
make  and  vary  them  to  any  extent  that  our  imagin- 
ations allow.  In  this  fabrication  we  have  a  field  for 
the  highest  efforts  of  genius  and  taste ;  a  field  on 
which  many  golden  harvests  have  been  reaped,  and 
one  whose  capacity  of  production  is  still  undimin- 
ished. 

Those  tropical  modes  of  expression  which  occa- 
sion most  difficulty  to  interpreters  generally,  and  to 
Biblical  interpreters  in  particular,  are  the  metaphor, 
allegory,  and  metonymy.  Others  are  important, 
particularly  personification,  which  is  of  frequent  oc- 
currence in  the  Bible,  and  also  hyperbole,  irony,  &c. 
but  they  seldom  occasion  any  serious  difficulty  in 
the  department  of  Interpretation. 

Metaphors.  A  metaphor  is  a  figure  of  speech  in 
which  one  or  more  words  are  used  out  of  their  ordi- 
nary sense,  to  express  a  different,  but  similar  or  anal- 
ogous meaning. 

5* 


46  THE    RULES    OR   LAWS   OF 

Metaphors  are  not  simple  comparisons  or  simili- 
tudes. For  in  a  simple  comparison,  every  word  is 
used  in  its  proper  and  ordinary  sense,  and  applied  to 
its  appropriate  object.  But  in  metaphorical  expres- 
sions, this  is  not  the  case.  For  example,  God  is  a 
consuming  jive.  Christians  are  the  light  of  the  world. 
Christ  is  the  good  shepherd,  and  the  pious  are  the 
sheep  of  his  care.  In  these  sentences,  the  words 
marked  by  italics  as  metaphorical,  are  not  used  in 
their  ordinary  and  proper  significations  ;  but  in  dif- 
ferent and  similar  or  analogous  ones.  The  depart- 
ure from  the  ordinary  sense  01*  these  words,  in  the 
above  examples,  is  total  and  obvious.  God  is  not 
literally  a  consuming  fire  ;  nor  Christians  light ;  nor 
Christ  a  shepherd  ;  nor  his  followers  sheep.  These 
declarations  however,  are  not  false,  or  unmeaning,  or 
even  obscure.  Every  word  of  which  they  consist, 
has  a  true  and  specific  sense,  which  is  indicated  with 
sufficient  clearness  to  candid  and  attentive  readers. 
Fire  denotes  those  qualities  and  operations  of  God, 
that  are  analogous  to  literal  fire  ;  light,  those  quali- 
ties and  operations  of  the  pious,  which  are  analogous 
to  light  ;  good  shepherd,  the  relation  and  character 
of  Christ,  as  our  moral  teacher,  governor,  and  pro- 
tector ;  and  sheep,  those  of  Christians,  as  being  the 
subjects  of  Divine  teaching,  government,  and  pro- 
tection. 

Metaphors  are  founded  on  analogy  or  similitude. 
The  literal  meanings  of  words  bear  a  strict  analogy 
to  their  metaphorical  ones.  It  is  impossible  to  put 
a  metaphorical  sense  upon  any  word,  that  shall  not 
be  analogous  to  one  of  its  literal  meanings.     A  per- 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  47 

ception  of  resemblance  between  different  ideas,  sug- 
gests the  application  of  the  appropriate  symbol  of 
one  of  them,  to  denote  another.  A  perception  of 
this  related  idea  is  as  necessary  in  the  interpretation 
of  metaphorical  language,  as  it  is  in  its  construction. 
That  related  idea  however,  though  obtained  by  re- 
curring to  the  literal  sense  of  the  metaphorical  word, 
is  no  part  of  its  meaning,  considered  as  a  metaphor, 
or  symbol  of  thought  metaphorically  expressed. 

The  true  meaning  of  a  metaphorical  expression, 
is  not  the  literal  meaning  of  the  words  so  used,  but 
the  figurative  or  tropical  sense  they  are  designed  in 
each  particular  connexion  to  express. 

Allegories.  An  allegory  is  a  continued  metaphor, 
and  differs  from  that  figure  in  being  of  greater  length. 
A  metaphor  consists  of  single  words  and  phrases  ; 
but  an  allegory  of  single  sentences  and  paragraphs  ; 
or  even  of  an  entire  discourse. 

The  metaphor  is  founded  on  resemblance.  The 
same  is  true  in  respect  to  the  allegory.  In  an  alle- 
gory, one  thing  is  expressed,  or  one  series  of  facts  is 
described,  with  a  view  to  illustrate  some  related  sub- 
ject or  series  of  facts.  The  narrative  of  the  prodigal 
son;  Luke  xv.  11 — 32:  That  of  the  marriage  of  the 
king's  son  ;  Matt.  xxii.  2 — 13  :  That  of  letting  out 
the  vineyard  ;  Matt.  xxi.  33 — 41 :  That  of  the  sower 
and  seed  ;  Matt.  xiii.  3 — 8 :  and  the  parables  of  the 
New  Testament  generally  are  of  this  class. 

The  significancy  of  an  allegory  depends  upon  a 
manifest  resemblance  between  the  allegorical  state- 
ment, literally  interpreted,  and  the  thing  signified  by 
it.     In  proportion  as  that  resemblance  is  obvious  and 


48  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

striking,  will  the  allegory  be  both  intelligible  and  im- 
pressive. 

Allegories  are  made  use  of  to  express  a  sense  over 
and  above  the  proper  sense  of  the  narrative  of  which 
they  consist,  and  entirely  distinct  from  it ;  a  sense 
of  which  the  literal  one  is  an  index  or  symbol. 

An  examination  of  either  of  the  New  Testament 
allegories  above  referred  to,  will  abundantly  confirm 
this  statement.  That  of  the  prodigal  son,  for  in- 
stance, was  not  designed  to  teach  us  the  particular 
series  of  facts,  which  make  up  the  narrative.  Those 
facts  have  undoubtedly  occurred  in  numberless  in- 
stances. A  knowledge  of  them  is  capable  of  being 
obtained  from  the  legitimate  sources  of  such  inform- 
ation. Our  Savior's  design  in  this  narrative,  howev- 
er, was  to  communicate  by  means  of  this,  a  higher 
series  of  facts,  in  relation  to  man,  considered  as  a 
sinner.  Agreeably  to  this  intention,  the  father  rep- 
resents God,  and  the  sons,  the  rational  and  moral 
creatures  of  God.  The  word  father,  is  not  a  meta- 
phor ;  but  it  is  a  part  of  the  allegory  ;  and  has  an 
allegorical  sense,  precisely  the  same  as  if  it  was  a 
metaphor,  used  to  denote  God.  The  same  is  true 
of  the  word  son  ;  of  his  departure,  dissipation,  mis- 
ery, repentance,  and  return  to  his  father's  house. 
All  these  transactions  are  the  symbols  of  other  and 
higher  transactions,  which  have  a  corresponding 
character  ;  and  which  relate  to  the  dealings  of  God 
with  sinners,  and  to  their  conduct  in  respect  to  him. 

The  words  which  constitute  this  allegory,  have 
their  appropriate  literal  or  metaphorical  significa- 
tions, subordinate  to  their  allegorical  one.    But  these 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION,  49 

are  not  their  true  and  full  import  in  the  present  case. 
They  are  only  indications  of  it.  Their  allegorical 
sense  is  that  which  they  are  principally  designed  to 
express,  and  with  this  their  true  and  ultimate  signifi- 
cancy  in  the  present  case,  begins  and  terminates. 

Metonymy.  Metonymy  embraces  a  class  of  trop- 
ical words  that  are  analogous  to  metaphors.  They 
are  founded  on  some  relation  which  one  object  bears 
to  another,  in  virtue  of  which,  the  name  of  the  for- 
mer may  be  used  to  denote  the  latter;  or  that  of  the 
latter  to  denote  the  former.  To  this  class  belong 
those  modes  of  expression  in  which  the  name  of  a 
cause  is  used  to  denote  the  effect ;  or  that  of  an  ef- 
fect to  denote  the  cause  ;  the  name  of  a  whole  to  de- 
note a  part,  or  that  of  a  part  to  denote  a  whole ; 
that  of  a  container  to  denote  the  thing  contained  ; 
or  that  of  the  thing  contained  to  denote  the  contain- 
er, &c. 

For  example,  to  bear  sins,  means  to  bear  the  con- 
sequences or  punishment  of  sins.  Drinking  of  this 
cup,  means  drinking  of  what  this  cup  contains.  Then 
went  out  all  Judea,  and  Jerusalem,  and  all  the  re- 
gion round  about  Jordan,  and  were  baptized,  means 
there  went  out  many  of  the  people  of  those  places, 
&c. 

The  metonymical  use  of  words  is  never  author- 
ized except  in  such  circumstances,  that  their  true 
meaning  will  be  obvious  to  careful  and  attentive 
readers.  The  same  is  true  in  respect  to  all  other 
tropical  modes  of  speech  ;  of  which  there  are  sev- 
eral. 

Personification.      Personification   is  a  figure  of 


50  THE   RULES    OR   LAWS    OF 

speech,  which  consists  in  ascribing  life  and  action 
to  inanimate  objects.  As,  hear,  O  earth  !  The  deep 
lifted  up  its  voice.     The  mountains  trembled. 

Hyperbole.  Hyperbole  consists  in  magnifying  an 
object  beyond  its  proper  bounds ;  not  with  a  view  to 
deceive,  but  to  secure  a  proper  degree  of  attention, 
and  to  make  a  suitable  and  just  impression  on  the 
mind  of  the  reader  or  hearer. 

Instances  of  both  are  frequent  in  the  Bible,  as  they 
are  in  every  species  of  impassioned  and  animated 
discourse.  They  are  capable  of  accurate  interpre- 
tation, according  to  their  respective  characters,  and 
the  connexions  in  which  they  occur. 

Sec.  5.    Rules  for  determining   the  literal 
meaning  of  single  words. 

Literal,  in  its  application  to  the  meaning  of  words, 
signifies  not  tropical  or  figurative.  It  comprehends 
all  those  significations  which  appropriately  belong 
to  words  as  the  established  and  conventional  sym- 
bols of  thought. 

It  is  in  their  literal  sense  that  words  are  generally 
used,  it  is  by  the  use  of  words  in  this  sense,  that 
all  accurate  and  precise  information  and  instruction 
are  conveyed,  both  in  respect  to  science,  politics,  and 
religion. 

The  investigation  of  the  literal  meaning  of  words, 
is  therefore  one  of  the  most  important  branches  of 
the  study  of  language.  Our  determinations  in  re- 
spect to  this  subject,  have  relation  to  the  greater  part 
of  the  Bible,  and  to  those  portions  of  Bible  truth, 
which  God  has  seen  fit  to  present  in  the  most  accu- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  51 

rate  and  determinate  mode  of  which  language  is 
susceptible. 

The  accuracy  and  precision  of  language,  when 
used  in  its  literal  sense,  entitles  it  to  an  investigation 
of  a  corresponding  character.  Besides,  the  inter- 
pretation of  tropical  language  depends  entirely  on 
the  literal  meaning  of  the  words  so  used.  The  liter- 
al meaning  of  all  the  words  of  the  Bible,  and  the  dif- 
ferent senses  in  which  some  of  them  are  used  in  dif- 
ferent connexions,  are  the  appropriate  objects  of  in- 
quiry to  every  reader  of  that  blessed  volume.  They 
are  objects  of  inquiry  that,  have  been  too  much  neg- 
lected ;  and  consequently  imperfectly  understood, 
and  often  incorrectly  explained. 

Great  attainments  are  possible  in  this  department 
of  sacred  learning.  It  is  one  which  every  man  has 
an  interest  in  prosecuting,  and  which  may  be  pros- 
ecuted successfully  by  every  man.  It  is  not  to  be 
supposed  that  every  man  can  possibly  know  all  that 
is  capable  of  being  known,  respecting  the  literal 
meaning  of  all  the  words  of  the  Bible  ;  but  that  eve- 
ry man  may  learn  much  that  is  important,  and  in- 
deed, that  which  will  be  sufficient  for  the  full  securi- 
ty of  his  immortal  interests,  is  a  matter  of  demonstra- 
tive certainty  ;  and  one  that  will  be  generally  con- 
ceded. 

Some  knowledge  of  the  literal  meaning  of  the 
words  of  the  Bible,  is  in  the  possession  of  every  one 
who  knows  any  thing  about  the  English  language, 
or  any  other  in  which  the  Sacred  Oracles  are  treasur- 
ed up,  either  as  origina  documents  or  faithful  trans- 
lations.    But  the  knowledge  of  most  on  this  subject 


52  THE   RULES    OR   LAWS   OF 

is  confessedly  imperfect,  to  a  fault.  And  this  igno- 
ranee  is  the  more  injurious  in  consequence  of  its  be- 
ing indulged  to  a  great  extent  unconsciously. 

Those  who  have  examined  particularly  the  sources 
of  information  respecting  this  subject,  are  compara- 
tively few.  The  views  of  the  multitude  in  relation 
to  it,  are  inaccurate  and  undefined  ;  and  rather  the 
result  of  casual  association,  than  of  profound  investi- 
gation and  judicious  study.  The  object  of  the  pres- 
ent section  is  to  exhibit  the  principles  which  indicate 
the  true  sense  of  words,  and  to  direct  the  unexperi- 
enced and  doubtful  inquirer  after  truth,  to  the  sources 
of  correct  and  certain  information  on  this  subject. 
We  may  sometimes  recur  to  the  sources  of  know- 
ledge without  obtaining  the  information  we  desire. 
But  the  cases  in  which  we  do  this  for  the  purpose 
of  determining  the  meaning  of  words  without  suc- 
cess, are  few  and  comparatively  unimportant. 

We  are  constantly  engaged  in  determining  the 
literal  meaning  of  words,  in  the  ordinary  inter- 
course of  society,  as  well  as  in  the  interpretation 
of  the  Sacred  Oracles.  How  do  we  accomplish 
this  work?  What  are  the  principles  and  rules  by 
which  we  are  governed  in  all  correct  decisions  on 
this  subject?  Answer.  The  ordinary  and  unequivo- 
cal indications  of  the  meaning  of  words,  are  com- 
prehended under  the  following  heads. 

1.  General  and  particular  usage. 

2.  Logical  definitions. 

3.  The  nature  of  the  subject. 

4.  The  obvious  purpose  and  design  of  the  dis- 
course. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  53 

5.  The  position  of  words  in  the  sentence  where 
they  occur. 

6.  The  context. 

7.  Examples. 

8.  Comparisons. 

9.  Antitheses. 

10.  Parallel  passages. 

All  these  are  important.  They  constitute  a  key 
to  the  right  exposition  of  words  and  sentences. 
Without  some  knowledge  of  them,  language  gener- 
ally, and  particularly  that  of  the  Bible,  would  be  in- 
explicable. By  the  dextrous  and  skilful  use  of 
them,  this  complex  and  diversified  symbol  of  thought 
is  made  to  yield  up  its  treasures  at  the  bidding  not 
of  a  few  master  spirits  only,  but  of  the  human  race. 
They  are  the  ultimate  and  almost  only  sources  of 
information  on  the  subject  in  question,  and  deserve 
to  be  prayerfully  and  attentively  considered. 

1.  General  and  particular  usage.  General  usage 
denotes  that  use  of  words  in  which  people  generally 
agree.  It  is  not  necessary  however,  that  this  agree- 
ment should  be  universal.  It  may  admit  of  occa- 
sional exceptions,  both  in  respect  to  individuals,  and 
in  application  to  particular  subjects.  It  may  have 
reference  to  a  single  meaning,  or  to  several  mean- 
ings of  which  a  word  is  susceptible. 

As  far  as  general  usage  in  respect  to  particular 

words  is  known,  it  is  a  certain  rule  of  interpretation. 

In  the  absence  of  proof  to  the  contrary,  every  word 

is  to  be  interpreted  in  that  signification,  or  in  one  of 

those  several  significations,  which  are  sanctioned  by 

general  usage.     Where  the  general  use  of  a  word  is 
6 


54  THE    RULES    OR    LAWS    OF 

not  fixed,  or  not  known,  we  are  obliged  to  have  re- 
course to  other  principles  for  determining  its  signifi- 
cation. When  that  use  is  fixed  and  known,  it  may 
be  departed  from,  but  never  without  evident  reason  ; 
and  not  unless  the  fact  is  indubitably  indicated  by 
evidence. 

Particular  usage  is  that  in  which  a  writer  or  speak- 
er departs  from  the  fixed  and  known  acceptation,  in 
which  a  word  is  used,  and  establishes  a  different 
usage,  not  sanctioned  by  that  of  others  generally.  It 
is  not  necessary  that  an  individual  should  be  alone  in 
attaching  a  peculiar  meaning  to  a  word,  in  order 
that  his  usage  should  be  entitled  to  the  appellation 
of  particular.  If  he  is  in  a  decided  minority,  this 
will  be  the  case. 

Whenever  a  particular  usage  is  established  in  the 
case  of  an  individual  or  class  of  persons,  in  respect 
to  a  word,  that  word,  in  their  communications,  is  to 
be  interpreted  according  to  that  particular  usage, 
and  not  according  to  the  more  general  usage  of  oth- 
ers. In  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  contrary,  that 
usage  is  always  to  be  observed.  Like  general  usage, 
when  not  superceded  by  this,  it  may  be  departed 
from,  but  never  without  manifest  reason  and  neces- 
sity. 

The  reason  of  this  rule  in  respect  to  general  and 
particular  usage,  is  obvious.  General  usage  is  the 
highest  authority  in  respect  to  the  true  meaning  of 
words.  Those  who  use  language,  seek  their  infor- 
mation in  respect  to  the  meaning  of  words,  from  this 
source.  To  this  standard,  as  far  as  they  have  ascer- 
tained it,  they  naturally  endeavor  to  conform.  They 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  55 

have  an  interest  in  doing  so.  An  unnecessary  devi- 
ation from  common  usage,  in  respect  to  the  signifi- 
cation of  words,  renders  our  communications  ob- 
scure and  incorrect.  No  intelligent  writer  practices 
it,  without  what  he  supposes  to  be  a  good  reason 
for  doing  so;  and  in  that  case,  he  finds  it  necessary 
to  indicate  clearly,  by  definition  or  otherwise,  what 
his  peculiar  usage  is. 

In  relation  to  general  and  particular  usage,  the  sa- 
cred writers  are  to  be  placed  at  least  on  an  eqality 
with  others.  They  are  entitled  to  more  than  this, 
inasmuch  as  their  inspiration  secured  them  from  er- 
rors in  this  respect,  into  which  others  are  liable  to 
fall.  Uninspired  writers  may  be  inaccurate,  and 
through  their  inaccuracy,  deceptive  or  unintelligible  ; 
but  this  can  never  have  been  the  case  with  those 
who  were  guided  by  the  Spirit  of  inspiration. 

A  frequent  reference  to  approved  dictionaries, 
with  a  view  to  ascertain  the  different  meanings  which 
general  usage  has  accorded  to  words,  is  highly  ne- 
cessary to  qualify  us  for  the  business  of  Biblical  In- 
terpretation. This  is  a  department  of  study  too 
much  neglected  by  ordinary  readers  of  the  Bible.  A 
constant  prosecution  of  it,  would  greatly  increase 
their  ability  to  interpret  the  Bible  correctly ;  and 
would  greatly  improve  their  apprehensions  of  its 
meaning  generally.  It  would  utterly  dissipate  the 
obscurity  which  to  the  view  of  multitudes,  hangs 
like  a  thick  cloud  over  many  of  the  most  interesting 
disclosures  of  Divine  truth. 

Habits  of  careful  and  extensive  reading,  have  a  sim- 
ilar effect,  in  increasing  our  knowledge  of  the  proper 


56  THE    RULES    OR   LAWS    OF 

and  generally  accredited  signification  of  words  ;  and 
contribute  to  increase  our  qualifications  for  the  busi- 
ness of  interpreting  the  Bible  or  any  other  book. 

2.  Logical  definitions.  Writers  may  define  their 
words  either  by  the  use  of  others  in  connexion  with 
them,  as  synonymous,  or  by  specifying  the  proper- 
ties of  the  object  or  action  to  which  they  are  applied. 
In  many  cases  the  definition  of  words  by  synony- 
mous terms,  is  the  most  concise,  and  at  the  same 
time  sufficiently  clear.  When  this  mode  of  defining 
words  is  not  practicable,  the  same  object  may  be  at- 
tained by  the  more  protracted  method  of  specifying 
the  leading  properties  or  attributes  of  the  object  or 
action  referred  to.  Sometimes  a  partial  definition 
is  sufficient  to  put  the  reader  in  full  possession  of 
the  author's  meaning,  when  the  entire  want  of  any 
thing  of  the  kind,  would  have  left  his  assertion  either 
equivocal  or  obscure. 

Every  judicious  writer  defines  his  terms  either 
perfectly  or  in  part,  wherever  he  supposes  it  neces- 
sary for  the  information  of  the  readers  for  whom  his 
communication  is  designed. 

This  course  has  been  pursued  by  the  inspired  wri- 
ters, as  well  as  by  others.  Many  of  their  words, 
they  have  either  perfectly  or  in  part  defined.  The 
meaning  of  those  words  therefore,  is  to  be  determin- 
ed by  their  own  direct  exposition  of  it.  Not  a  single 
inspired  definition,  whether  designed  to  be  complete 
or  partial,  can  be  neglected  with  safety.  The  least 
deviation  from  them,  in  cases  to  which  they  legiti- 
mately apply,  is  a  deviation  from  certain  and  inspir- 
ed truth. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  57 

The  practice  of  introducing  logical  definitions 
wherever  they  are  necessary,  is  suggested  by  com- 
mon sense,  and  sanctioned  by  common  usage.  It  is 
the  practice  of  the  writers  of  every  age  and  country, 
and  of  every  class,  from  the  lowest  and  most  illiter- 
ate, to  those  of  the  greatest  refinement  and  learning. 

An  adherence  to  these  definitions  therefore,  when 
they  are  introduced,  is  but  acting  in  conformity  with 
one  of  the  first  principles  of  verbal  communication. 
It  is  as  necessary  to  the  right  interpretation  of  the 
Sacred  Scriptures  as  it  is  to  that  of  any  other  class 
of  writings. 

Under  the  head  of  logical  definitions,  may  be  com- 
prehended the  mention  of  all  those  circumstances 
and  relations  which  possess  a  definitive  character. 
These  are  numerous,  and  the  mention  of  them  is 
frequent,  both  in  the  Scriptures  and  in  human  pro- 
ductions. The  timely  and  appropriate  introduction 
of  them,  contributes  essentially  to  promote  the  per- 
spicuity both  of  written  and  oral  language,  but  par- 
ticularly of  the  former. 

Of  these,  the  circumstances  of  time,  place  and  or- 
der, are  important ;  and  the  relation  of  cause  and  ef- 
fect, antecedence  and  consequence. 

The  relations  of  similarity  and  contrast,  are  not 
included  under  this  head,  being  deemed  worthy  of  a 
separate  place  among  the  rules  of  Interpretation. 
The  range  however,  within  which  this  rule  is  de- 
signed to  apply,  is  by  no  means  limited,  or  the  cases 
unimportant. 

3.  The  nature  of  the  subject.  The  subject  of  eve- 
ry sentence,  is  that  to  which  the  sentence  chiefly  re- 
6* 


58  THE    RULES    OR   LAWS    OF 

lates.  The  subject  of  a  paragraph  or  discourse,  is 
that  to  which  the  paragraph  or  discourse  chiefly  re- 
lates. The  subject  of  a  discourse  may  be  termed  a 
general  one,  and  that  of  a  paragraph  or  sentence 
subordinate. 

These  subjects  are  often  fully  or  partially  known, 
and  in  such  cases,  afford  essential  aid  in  determining 
the  meaning  of  words  relating  to  them.  When  they 
are  known,  and  as  far  as  they  are  known,  they 
ought  to  be  constantly  kept  in  view,  in  determining 
the  signification  of  single  words. 

A  due  consideration  of  them  is  necessary  to  the 
right  understanding  of  some  words,  in  every  dis- 
course however  simple,  and  in  almost  every  para- 
graph. 

This  rule,  though  understood  theoretically  by  fewr 
is  practically  understood,  to  some  extent,  by  all. 
We  learn  to  apply  it  in  some  cases  almost  as  soon  as 
we  learn  the  use  of  language.  We  apply  it  in  ex- 
planation of  the  meaning  of  many  words,  from  our 
early  childhood,  and  continue  to  do  so  through  all 
our  later  years.  Without  the  application  of  it  in 
any  instance,  the  ordinary  intercourse  of  society 
could  not  be  successfully  carried  on,  or  the  ordinary 
productions  of  genius  and  erudition  understood. 

There  are  three  cases  in  which  a  regard  to  the  sub- 
ject treated  of,  is  necessary. 

(I.)  When  the  word  whose  meaning  we  wish  to 
determine  has  several  different  and  well  established 
significations.  Many  of  the  most  important  words, 
both  of  common  and  occasional  use,  are  of  this  de- 
scription, and  afford  frequent  occasion  for  the  appli- 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  59 

cation  of  the  rule  under  consideration.  It  is  often 
impossible  in  the  interpretation  of  these  words,  to 
determine  which  of  their  several  meanings  is  intend- 
ed, in  any  other  way.  The  neglect  to  apply  this 
rule  in  such  cases,  anil  the  careless  application  of  it, 
have  been  a  fruitful  source  of  error. 

(2.)  When  a  word  has  a  single  and  definite  signifi- 
cation, which  we  have  not  the  direct  means  of  as- 
certaining with  certainty,  from  the  general  sources 
of  information,  or  in  regard  to  which,  those  whom 
we  deem  high  authorities,  differ  in  opinion.  These 
words  are  generally  of  the  class  last  mentioned  ; 
that  is,  having  a  plurality  of  significations,  but  at  the 
same  time  are  assigned  by  particular  usage  to  ex- 
press a  particular  and  controverted  meaning,  in  par- 
ticular connexions,  and  in  relation  to  particular  sub- 
jects. 

The  question  in  this  case  is  not.  whether  a  partic- 
ular established  meaning  is  the  true  one,  in  a  partic- 
ular class  of  passages  ;  but  whether  a  particular 
controverted  meaning  can  be  established  as  the  true 
one.  In  the  prosecution  of  such  inquiries,  which  are 
not  unfrequent  in  the  study  of  the  Scriptures,  a  com- 
petent and  accurate  knowledge  of  the  subject,  and 
a  due  regard  to  it,  are  of  the  utmost  importance. 

(3.)  When  a  word  is  used  in  a  tropical  or  figura- 
tive sense,  to  express  an  idea  which  is  not  included 
among  its  established  meanings.  In  all  such  cases, 
which  are  of  frequent  occurrence,  a  regard  to  the 
known  nature  of  the  subject  is  indispensable,  and 
generally  decisive  of  the  meaning  intended. 

The  subject  referred  to  may  be  either  the  leading 


60  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS    OF 

subject  of  a  discourse,  or  the  subordinate  one  of  a 
paragraph  or  sentence.  A  word  may  be  used  in  di- 
rect relation  to  either,  and  is  to  be  explained  by  that 
to  which  it  directly  relates  ;  but  always  in  conform- 
ity with  the  nature  of  the  leading  and  general  sub- 
ject. 

Our  knowledge  of  the  nature  of  the  subject,  in  any 
particular  case,  depends  of  course  very  much  on  our 
previous  acquirements.  Different  persons  possess 
different  degrees  of  it,  in  relation  to  the  same  case. 
All  however,  possess  some  degree  of  such  knowledge 
in  reference  to  many  of  the  subjects  treated  of  in  the 
Scriptures,  and  in  other  works. 

There  are  many  exhibitions  of  truth,  both  in  the 
Bible  and  in  human  productions,  which  ignorant  per- 
sons are  not  competent  to  understand.  They  cannot 
be  understood  without  previous  knowledge  of  those 
truths  that  are  more  simple  and  elementary,  and 
which  serve  to  elucidate  them.  If  persons  will  not 
take  the  pains  requisite  to  obtain  this  previous  know- 
ledge, they  must  expect  to  be  shut  out  from  a  per- 
ception of  the  higher  mysteries,  both  of  science  and 
religion. 

There  is  a  natural  order  to  be  observed  in  the  at- 
tainment of  knowledge,  both  human  and  divine. 
We  must  first  learn  that  which  is  simple.  We  may 
then  enter  with  success  on  the  investigation  of  that 
which  is  complicated,  and  comparatively  obscure. 

The  attainment  of  a  knowledge  of  letters,  precedes 
that  of  words,  sentences,  and  discourses.  The  read- 
er is  first  put  to  reading  that  which  is  simple  and  ea- 
sy ;  and  afterwards  that  which  is  more  difficult  and 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  61 

obscure.  So  in  every  science.  The  elements  are 
first  studied,  and  afterwards  their  complex  applica- 
tions and  relations. 

This  principle  is  too  much  overlooked  by  the  would- 
be  interpreters  of  the  Bible.  Many  who  can  hardly 
interpret  the  simplest  of  our  municipal  laws,  or  of 
those  legal  instruments  which  are  the  charters  of 
our  personal  rights  and  privileges,  have  the  arro- 
gance not  only  to  sit  in  judgment  on  the  deepest 
mysteries  of  religion  ;  but  confidently  to  oppose  their 
superficial,  contradictory,  and  absurd  interpretations 
of  Divine  truth,  against  the  almost  unanimous  ver- 
dict of  the  Christian  world. 

But  what !  says  the  objector.  Am  I  not  to  think 
for  myself?  Has  not  every  man  a  right  to  be  his  own 
interpreter  of  the  Sacred  Oracles  ?  Most  certainly. 
But  you  are  to  think  according  to  the  dictates  of 
reason  and  judgment.  And  if  you  presume  to  in- 
terpret the  Sacred  Oracles,  which  you  are  bound  to 
do  according  to  your  ability,  for  yourself;  you  are  to 
do  it  according  to  the  established  laws  of  language, 
and  the  known  dictates  of  reason. 

One  of  those  laws  undoubtedly  is,  that  the  known 
nature  of  the  subject  contributes  to  determine  the 
signification  of  many  of  the  words  relating  to  it ;  and 
that  as  far  as  knowledge  of  that  subject  can  be  ob- 
tained from  other  sources,  such  knowledge  is  often 
indispensably  necessary  to  the  right  understanding 
of  particular  exhibitions  of  truth  respecting  it. 

There  is  that  in  the  Bible  which  the  most  simple  and 
ignorant  can  understand  ;  and  there  is  that  among 
the  sublime  and  recondite  disclosures  of  this  volume, 


62  THE    RULES    OR   LAWS   OF 

which  the  most  simple  and  ignorant  cannot  fully  un- 
derstand, and  are  not  competent  to  interpret.  They 
must  correct  gross  ignorance  by  the  patient  investi- 
gation of  that  which  is  simple  and  easy,  before  they 
can  possibly  grasp  that  which  is  in  its  nature,  or  in 
the  circumstances  and  mode  of  its  exhibition,  compli- 
cated and  obscure. 

They  must  ascertain  something  of  the  nature  of 
religious  subjects  from  those  Biblical  expositions  of 
them,  which  are  simple  and  elementary,  before  they 
can  possibly  interpret  aright,  such  as  are  abstruse 
and  complicated. 

A  mistake  in  regard  to  the  nature  of  the  subject 
treated  of,  in  substituting  for  it  something  else,  or  in 
misapprehending  its  characteristic  features,  is  the 
cause  of  multiplied  subordinate  and  fundamental  er- 
rors, in  determining  the  meaning  of  words.  Such 
mistakes  are  often  the  result  of  prejudice  and  negli- 
gence, where  there  is  otherwise  no  want  of  previ- 
ous and  elementary  knowledge  on  the  subjects  ex- 
hibited. 

4.  The  obvious  design  and  purpose  of  a  discourse. 
By  the  design  and  purpose  of  a  discourse,  is  meant 
the  end  which  the  author  had  in  view  in  writing  it ; 
or  the  particular  impression,  or  conviction  which, 
considered  as  a  whole,  it  is  adapted  to  make  on  the 
mind  of  an  unbiased  reader. 

This  design  may  be  simple,  or  complex  ;  manifest, 
or  obscure ;  according  to  the  nature  of  the  discourse, 
and  the  circumstances  in  which  it  is  constructed. 
Sometimes  it  is  explicitly  asserted  ;  sometimes  indi- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  63 

cated  by  circumstantial  evidence  ;  and  often  by  the 
internal  structure  of  the  discourse  and  the  context. 

When  the  design  of  a  discourse  is  obvious,  no 
matter  by  what  means  it  is  made  so,  it  affords  valu- 
able aid  for  determining,  with  precision,  the  meaning 
of  many  words  which  it  contains.  Writers  often 
use  words  that  would  be  otherwise  indeterminate 
or  obscure,  in  reliance  on  the  manifest  design  of 
their  discourse,  to  indicate  the  sense  they  attach  to 
them.  Such  indication  of  the  sense  intended,  is  suf- 
ficient in  thousands  of  cases,  when  correct  interpre- 
tation would  be  greatly  embarrassed,  if  not  rendered 
impossible,  without  it. 

The  purpose  and  design  of  a  discourse,  when  man- 
ifest, is  one  of  the  principal  means  of  rendering  the 
signification  of  those  words  which  have  different 
established  senses,  as  well  as  those  whose  significa- 
tions are  in  their  nature  indefinite,  expressive  of  a 
definite  and  certain  sense.  Much  of  the  perspicui- 
ty and  precision  of  language,  are  owing  to  this  prin- 
ciple ;  and  in  the  absence  of  it,  or  through  ignorance 
of  it,  would  be  unavoidably  and  irrecoverably  lost. 

The  known  design  and  purpose  of  the  discourse 
is  often  useful  in  giving  clearness  and  sufficiency  to 
other  indications  of  the  true  sense  of  important 
words.  When  that  sense  is  made  probable  by  other 
evidence,  confirmation  derived  from  this  source,  is 
often  decisive  ;  converting  what  would  otherwise  be 
probability,  into  certainty.  When  we  should  oth- 
erwise hesitate  between  different  interpretations, 
both  sustained  by  some  degree  of  probable  evidence, 
the  design  and  purpose  of  the  discourse  not  unfre- 


64  THE   RULES    OR   LAWS    CF 

quently  turns  the  scale,  and  makes  the  ground  of 
correct  judgment  substantial  and  obvious. 

The  rule  that  words  ought  to  be  interpreted  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  manifest  design  and  purpose  of  the 
discourse,  ought  to  be  applied  to  all  the  cases  where 
it  is  truly  applicable.  These  are  numerous.  But  it 
ought  to  be  used  with  especial  caution.  Much  con- 
sideration is  often  requisite,  to  determine  what  the 
design  and  purpose  of  a  discourse  is,  even  where  that 
point  is  capable  of  being  fully  ascertained.  Having 
settled  that  point  correctly,  we  ought  to  be  particu- 
larly strict  and  thorough,  in  determining  its  bearing 
on  the  interpretation  of  single  words.  We  ought 
not  to  decide  that  a  word  is  required  to  be  interpret- 
ed in  a  particular  sense,  in  preference  to  some  other 
possible  one,  on  this  ground,  unless  the  reason  for 
such  an  inference  is  obvious  and  decisive. 

The  rule  under  consideration  is  useful  in  enabling 
us  to  detect  erroneous  interpretations,  as  well  as  to 
establish  and  confirm  those  which  are  right. 

Whatever  difficulty  there  may  often  be  in  deter- 
mining whether  the  agreement  of  a  particular  signifi- 
cation of  a  word,  with  the  design  and  purpose  of  a 
discourse  or  paragraph,  affords  decisive  evidence  or 
not,  in  its  favor ;  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  re- 
spect to  the  Bible,  any  interpretation  in  regard  to 
which  there  is  a  manifest  disagreement  of  this  kind, 
must  be  erroneous. 

5.  The  position  of  words  in  a  sentence ;  or  what  is 
the  same  thing,  their  grammatical  relations.  Words 
which  belong  to  the  same  sentence,  contribute  essen- 
tially to  illustrate  and  explain  each  other.    This  is 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION'.  65 

particularly  true  of  those  which  are  grammatically 
related  in  respect  to  qualification,  concord,  or  gov- 
ernment. The  adjective  and  adverb  limit  the  signifi- 
cation of  the  words  which  they  qualify,  and  assist  in 
expressing  the  different  modifications  of  the  same 
general  idea,  both  in  respect  to  the  more  delicate 
shades  of  meaning,  and  in  respect  to  such  as  are 
palpable  and  obvious.  The  nominative  helps  to  de- 
termine the  signification  of  the  verb,  and  is  often  de- 
cisive in  this  respect ;  and  the  verb,  in  turn,  some- 
times illustrates  the  true  meaning  of  the  nominative, 
where  it  is  not  fully  indicated  by  other  means  ;  and 
also  that  of  other  related  words,  particularly  the  ob- 
ject on  which  its  action,  when  it  is  active,  termin- 
ates. 

Almost  every  word  in  a  sentence,  in  addition  to 
its  own  separate  meaning,  helps  to  fix  and  indicate 
the  meaning  of  one  or  more  related  words.  We 
avail  ourselves  of  aid  from  this  source,  unconscious- 
ly, and  almost  incessantly.  We  could  not  easily 
maintain  the  ordinary  intercourse  of  society  without 
it.  Many  modes  of  expression,  that  are  now  per- 
spicuous and  unequivocal,  would  become  of  an  op- 
posite character,  if  it  were  not  for  this  principle. 

The  study  of  a  foreign  or  ancient  language,  affords 
impressive  evidence  of  the  reality  and  value  of  the 
principle  stated  in  this  paragraph.  Every  one  who 
has  in  riper  years  commenced  the  study  of  a  lan- 
guage, knows  what  perhaps  he  had  failed  to  observe 
in  respect  to  his  vernacular  tongue,  that  he  can  make 
no  considerable  progress  in  determining  the  mean- 
7 


t)b  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

ing  of  single  words,  till  he  has  ascertained  with  pre- 
cision their  grammatical  relations. 

6.  The  context.  Any  portion  of  Scripture  is  de- 
nominated a  text.  Those  parts  of  the  Sacred  Ora- 
cles which  are  contiguous  to  any  text,  and  which 
belong  to  the  same  discourse,  are  called  its  context, 
or  adjoining  text.  The  context  includes  those  pas- 
sages that  immediately  precede,  and  those  that  im- 
mediately follow  the  text  to  which  they  relate. 

Such  is  the  mutual  connexion  between  the  contig- 
uous parts  of  a  well  constructed  discourse,  that  a 
consideration  of  one  is  often  necessary  to  a  right  un- 
derstanding of  another.  That  which  precedes,  pre- 
pares the  way  for  that  which  follows  ;  and  that 
which  follows  illustrates  and  defines  that  which  pre- 
cedes. Thoughts  occur  in  train  to  the  mind  of  a 
writer.  One  suggests  another,  and  the  expression 
of  one  often  renders  that  of  a  related  one  necessary 
to  its  full  development.  The  train  of  thought  is  de- 
noted by  the  context.  This  is  often  sufficient  of  it- 
self, to  indicate  the  sense  of  important,  and  otherwise 
ambiguous  words. 

The  context,  or  train  of  thought,  or  series  of  the 
discourse,  are  forms  of  expression  which  relate  to 
the  same  subject,  and  amount  substantially  to  the 
same  thing.  The  extent  to  which  they  illustrate  the 
meaning  of  single  words,  is  truly  surprising  to  one 
that  has  not  paid  particular  attention  to  this  depart- 
ment of  the  laws  of  Interpretation.  They  are  refer- 
red to  incessantly  in  all  our  reading,  both  of  the 
Scriptures  and  of  human  productions.  Some  parts 
of  almost  every  discourse  would  be  utterly  unintelli- 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  67 

gible,  if  it  were  not  for  the  light  reflected  from  this 
quarter.  A  complex  and  unusual  construction  of 
words  in  a  sentence,  and  the  use  of  words  that  are 
indefinite  in  their  nature,  or  unusual  and  inperfectly 
understood,  are  often  illustrated  by  the  context,  when 
other  sources  of  evidence  fail. 

So  habitual  is  the  use  we  make  of  this  rule,  in  all 
our  reading,  both  of  the  Scriptures  and  of  human 
productions,  that  we  are  hardly  sensible  of  it.  In 
most  cases  of  difficulty,  we  do  it  naturally,  and  al- 
most unconsciously  ;  and  usually  with  perfect  facili- 
ty and  complete  success. 

And  yet,  as  is  too  often  the  case  in  respect  to  all 
the  other  rules  of  Interpretation,  so  in  respect  to  this, 
we  sometimes  hurry  to  a  conclusion,  or  give  up  an 
inquiry  in  discouragement,  without  making  that  ef- 
fectual use  of  it,  which  might  be  made. 

7.  Examples.  An  example  is  a  particular  instance 
illustrating  a  word,  a  general  rule,  precept,  or  pro- 
position of  any  kind.  An  instance  of  the  exercise  of 
faith  in  the  case  of  Abraham,  or  of  any  other  true 
believer,  is  an  example  of  faith.  An  instance  of 
prayer,  is  an  example  of  prayer ;  one  of  love  is  an 
example  of  love  ;  and  so  in  respect  to  other  princi- 
ples and  precepts,  that  might  be  mentioned  or  refer- 
red to  indefinitely. 

The  formal  introduction  of  examples,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  illustration,  is  exceedingly  common  and  high- 
ly useful.  They  are  often  also  introduced  informal- 
ly, and  serve  to  illustrate  the  true  meaning  of  words, 
in  subordination  to  other,  and  even  higher  designs. 

Writers  on  the  sciences  and  arts,  find  it  necessary 


68  THE    RULES    OR   LAWS    OF 

to  make  frequent  and  almost  constant  use  of  exam- 
ples, for  the  purpose  of  expressing  their  ideas  with 
clearness.  Without  the  aid  derived  from  this  mode 
of  illustration,  their  instructions  would,  in  manj' 
cases  where  they  are  now  obvious,  be  exceedingly 
difficult  of  apprehension,  if  not  utterly  unintelligible. 
Our  expositions  of  human  science  and  art,  are  full 
of  examples  illustrative  of  the  meaning  of  proposi- 
tions and  principles,  or  what  amounts  to  the  same 
thing,  of  the  meaning  of  words-  A  man  that  should 
endeavor  to  investigate  and  interpret  them,  without 
attending  at  all,  or  even  closely,  to  those  examples, 
would  find  himself  engaged  in  a  Herculean  task. 
Such  folly  however,  in  respect  to  works  on  human 
science,  is  seldom  indulged  to  any  considerable  ex- 
tent. It  very  soon  corrects  itself,  and  convicts  its 
subject  of  his  error. 

Religion  affords  the  theater  on  which  human  folly 
has  effected  its  most  extravagant  developments. 
Here  the  ridiculous  has  raved  in  the  stolen  garb  of 
sublimity  ;  and  errors  that  would  have  ensured  con- 
tempt and  scorn  in  any  other  relation,  have  been 
stumbled  upon  by  deceivers  and  the  deceived,  as  the 
very  stepping  stones  to  earthly  distinction  and  heav- 
enly glory. 

The  Bible  is  an  exposition  of  religious  science.  It 
abounds  with  examples  illustrative  of  the  meaning 
of  its  principal  words.  The  interpreter  is  as  much 
required  to  notice  these  examples,  and  adhere  to 
them,  as  the  student  of  human  science  is,  to  avail 
himself  of  the  similar  illustrations  with  which  that 
is  furnished. 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  69 

The  examples  of  the  Christian  duties  and  virtues, 
which  shine  forth  from  every  part  of  the  Bible,  af- 
ford the  most  important  aid  in  determining,  with  pre- 
cision, the  meaning  of  the  numerous  terms  by  which 
those  subjects  of  inspired  truth  are  severally  indica- 
cated.  The  same  is  true  of  many  sins  which  the 
Scriptures  prohibit.  What  they  are  is  indicated  by 
examples,  as  effectually  as  in  any  other  way  ;  and 
example  sometimes  places  in  the  clearest  light  par- 
ticular prohibitions  that  would  be  altogether  obscure 
without  this  illustration. 

Those  interpretations  of  the  preceptive  portions  of 
the  Bible,  which  are  not  in  conformity  with  its  ex- 
amples, must  of  course  be  wrong.  Such  interpreta- 
tions are  not  uncommon  with  that  numerous  class 
of  persons,  who  wish  to  restrict  and  soften  down  the 
Bible  system  to  as  near  a  conformity  as  possible, 
with  the  usages  and  dictates  of  unhumbled  and  un- 
sanctified  nature. 

8.  Comparisons.  A  comparison  is  an  assertion, 
in  which  one  object  or  attribute  is  represented  as  hav- 
ing some  resemblance  or  analogy  to  another.  It 
consists  of  the  enunciation  of  two  different  ideas,  ei- 
ther simple  or  complex,  with  an  express  indication 
of  some  analogy  or  resemblance  between  them. 

That  class  of  comparisons  which  is  designed  to 
improve  our  conceptions  of  the  object,  or  ideas  com- 
pared, is  most  particularly  useful  in  promoting  the 
perspicuity  of  language,  and  facilitating  its  interpre- 
tation. The  very  design  of  this  numerous  class 
of  comparisons,  renders  it  necessary,  that  the  idea 
or  object   to  which  another  is  compared,  should  be 


70  THE    RULES    OR   LAWS    OF 

one  that  is  easily  or  generally  understood  by  those 
for  whom  the  communication  is  designed.  There 
are  many  cases  in  which  the  method  of  illustrating 
the  meaning  of  our  words  by  comparisons,  is  supe- 
rior to  any  other.  It  is  therefore  in  common  use 
with  every  class  of  writers,  both  sacred  and  profane. 
And  in  making  use  of  comparisons,  where  they 
occur,  to  illustrate  the  meaning  of  the  words  which 
enter  into  them,  we  are  only  acting  in  conformity 
with  the  very  design  and  purpose  of  their  introduc- 
tion. The  neglect  to  do  this,  is  an  obvious  and 
criminal  neglect  of  one  of  the  sources  of  informa- 
tion on  this  subject,  which,  wherever  it  exists,  sheds 
a  clear  and  certain  light  on  the  path  of  correct  inter- 
pretation. 

9.  Antitheses.  An  antithesis  is  an  assertion  in 
which  one  object  or  attribute  is  placed  in  opposition 
to  another  of  the  same  kind,  for  the  purpose  of  pre- 
senting one  or  both  of  them  vividly  and  forcibly  to 
the  mind.  The  design  of  the  antithesis  is  to  pro- 
mote clearness  and  force  of  expression.  This  de- 
sign, when  used  judiciously,  it  effectually  accomplish- 
es. Many  statements  both  of  fact  and  of  doctrine, 
which  would  be  sufficiently  explicit  and  perspicuous, 
to  be  understood  when  stated  singly,  are  made  still 
more  so  when  expressed  antithetically. 

Antithetical  expressions  are  frequent  in  the  Sacred 
Scriptures,  and  contribute  to  promote  and  establish 
the  correct  interpretation  of  their  doctrines. 

The  ideas  antithetically  expressed,  are  indicated 
by  the  natural  meaning  and  force  of  the  words  which 
compose  the  respective  members  of  the  antithesis  ; 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  71 

and  are  still  further  evinced  by  the  light  of  contrast 
which  is  reflected  from  each  to  the  other.  The  prin- 
ciple by  which  we  ought  to  interpret  antitheses,  is 
that  of  their  construction,  namely ;  that  the  two 
parts  express  corresponding  and  directly  opposite 
ideas  of  the  same  generic  kind.  By  a  careful  observ- 
ance of  this  principle,  when  one  branch  of  the  antith- 
esis is  definite  and  the  other  is  indefinite,  in  itself 
considered,  the  former  may  afford  essential  aid  in 
determining  the  signification  of  the  latter.  So  that 
if  either  branch  of  an  antithesis  is  clear,  we  may  de- 
rive from  it  effectual  aid  in  determining  the  sense  of 
the  corresponding  and  opposite  branch. 

A  knowledge  of  this  principle  is  useful  for  the  con- 
firmation of  many  important  conclusions,  respecting 
the  meaning  of  Scripture  expressions,  derived  from 
other  sources.  There  is  hardly  a  material  error  that 
may  not  be  controlled  by  it,  and  hardly  a  Bible-truth 
to  which  it  does  not  afford  confirmation.  A  careful 
study  and  intelligent  application  of  the  principles  re- 
lating to  antitheses  greatly  facilitate  both  the  discov- 
ery of  truth  and  the  detection  of  error. 

For  example,  Mark  xvi.  16 ;  "  He  that  believeth 
and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved  ;  but  he  that  believeth 
not  shall  be  damned."  This  passage  is  evidently  an 
antithesis,  a  direct  opposition  of  meaning  existing 
between  its  members.  Believers  are  a  class  of  per- 
sons the  very  opposite  of  unbelievers,  in  respect  to 
the  exercise  of  faith.  Being  saved,  is  the  opposite 
of  being  damned.  All  this  is  too  obvious  to  admit  of 
a  reasonable  doubt.  It  is  perceived  intuitively  and  in- 
stantly, the  moment  a  man,  familiar  with  the  Ian- 


72  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

guage  of  the  Scriptures,  fixes  his  attention  upon  the 
passage.  The  antithetical  relation  of  the  phrases, 
"  shall  be  saved,"  and  "  shall  be  damned,"  proves, 
aside  from  any  evidence  derived  from  other  sources, 
that  they  are  not  of  similar  but  of  opposite  import. 
The  subjects  of  these  two  sentences,  are  men  of  op- 
posite characters,  in  respect  to  faith  ;  the  predicates 
denote  opposite  states  of  being,  which  result  from 
these  opposite  characters,  and  correspond  to  them. 
Being  damned,  therefore,  as  used  in  this  passage,  is 
the  reverse  of  being  saved  by  faith.  If  being  saved 
by  faith  in  Christ,  denotes  a  transient  and  trivial  ben- 
efit ;  being  damned  for  unbelief  in  respect  to  him, 
may  denote  for  aught  that  appears  in  this  passage, 
a  transient  and  trivial  inconvenience  or  injury.  But 
if,  as  it  is  undoubtedly  the  fact,  salvation  by  faith  in 
Christ,  comprehends  our  future  and  eternal  felicity 
in  heaven  ;  then  as  certainly,  does  damnation  com- 
prehend the  reverse  of  this,  our  future  and  eternal 
misery  ;  the  misery  of  hell.  This  conclusion  is  le- 
gitimate and  inevitable,  because  what  is  affirmed  in 
one  member  of  the  antithesis,  cannot,  without  ab- 
surdity, be  comprehended  in  the  affirmation  of  the 
other.  Salvation  and  damnation  are  not  only  differ- 
ent, but  opposite  states  of  being. 

An  examination  of  Matt.  xxv.  46,  will  lead  to  a 
similar  result.  "  These  shall  go  away  into  everlast- 
ing punishment,  but  the  righteous  into  life  eternal. " 
In  this  passage,  these,  referring  to  the  wicked,  is 
placed  in  direct  contrast  with,  the  righteous,  as  de- 
noting persons  of  an  opposite  character.  This  is  in 
conformity  with  the  usage  of  the  sacred  writers  gen- 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  73 

erally.  So  also,  eternal  life,  the  portion  of  the  right- 
eous, is  placed  in  contrast  with  eternal  or  everlast- 
ing death,  the  allotment  of  the  wicked.  The  words 
translated  eternal  and  everlasting,  are  the  same  in 
the  original,  and  were  injudiciously  varied,  in  the 
translation  in  common  use,  merely  for  the  sake  of 
euphony  or  agreeable  sound.  The  life  eternal,  and 
everlasting  and  eternal  punishment,  are  opposed  to 
each  other,  as  contemporaneous  states  of  being.  If 
the  former  therefore,  denotes  as  it  must  do,  the  end- 
less felicity  of  heaven,  the  latter  can  designate  noth- 
ing less  than  the  contemporaneous  and  equally  end- 
less miseries  of  hell. 

10.  Parallel  passages.  The  occurrence  of  the 
same  word  in  two  different  passages  of  Scripture, 
does  not  necessarily  constitute  them  parallel.  As 
most  words  have  several  different  significations,  they 
may  of  course,  be  used  in  different  connexions,  to 
designate  ideas  entirely  different.  Neither  does  the 
use  of  any  particular  word  in. the  same  sense,  in  dif- 
ferent passages  of  Scripture,  constitute  them  neces- 
sarily parallel.  This  may  occur  and  the  subjects  be 
entirely  different. 

Parallel  passages  are  those  which  relate  to  the 
same  subject,  and  express  a  similar  sense.  No  oth- 
ers are  properly  of  this  class.  All  that  possess  this 
relative  character,  whether  their  phraseology  is  sim- 
ilar or  diverse,  are  comprehended  under  this  denom- 
ination. Great  diversity  of  expression  may  exist  in 
passages  that  are  truly  parallel. 

Parallelisms  may  be  historical,  doctrinal,  or  pro- 
phetical.    In  whatever  department  of  the  Sacred 


74  THE    RILES    OR    LAWS    OF 

Oracles  they  occur,  they  merit  particular  attention, 
and  are  of  high  importance  to  the  interpreter.  They 
are  useful  in  the  study  of  Biblical  history ;  but  in 
that  of  the  prophecies,  and  of  Scripture  doctrine, 
they  are  all  important.  We  can  do  nothing  to  effect 
without  them. 

If  any  person  wishes  to  understand  correctly  the 
Christian  system  of  religion,  he  must  diligently  com- 
pare the  several  different  passages  in  which  the  same 
doctrine  is  taught.  Those  doctrines  cannot  be  ac- 
curately ascertained  in  any  other  way.  No  man 
can  prayerfully  and  candidly  study  them  in  this  way, 
without  benefit. 

The  comparison  of  parallel  passages  is  important, 
in  the  interpretation  of  any  work,  whether  ancient 
or  modern  ;  in  our  native  dialect,  or  in  foreign 
tongues.  But  it  is  most  important  in  respect  to  an- 
cient works,  and  those  originally  written  in  foreign 
languages,  because  they  are  most  likely  to  be  ob- 
scure. It  is  most  important  of  all,  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Bible,  because  that  is  the  most  ancient 
work  in  existence,  in  respect  to  some  of  its  parts  ; 
because  it  was  originally  written  in  ancient  and  for- 
eign languages  ;  because  many  of  its  communica- 
tions are  such  as  we  know  nothing  at  all  about,  ex- 
cept what  we  learn  from  this  source  ;  because  of  its 
considerable  magnitude  ;  and  because  many  of  its 
different  portions  were  given  for  the  express  purpose 
of  explaining  other  remote  portions  of  the  same ; 
and  of  correcting  errors  respecting  them,  into  which 
persons  had  already  fallen  or  were  liable  to  fall. 

Parallel  passages  when  compared,  reflect  light  on 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  75 

each  other  in  various  ways.  That  which  is  wanting 
to  a  perfect  understanding  of  the  assertion  in  one,  is 
found  in  another  ;  and  that  which  is  wanting  to  a  per- 
fect understanding  of  the  latter,  is  found  in  the  for- 
mer ;  and  so  on.  So  that  it  may  often  happen,  that 
two  passages  would  both  be  incorrectly  interpreted, 
if  considered  alone,  and  both  be  fully  and  correctly 
understood,  if  compared  together. 

The  sentiment  that  is  to  us,  in  our  peculiar  cir- 
cumstances, expressed  obscurely  in  one  passage, 
may  often  by  the  light  of  another,  relating  evidently 
to  the  same  subject,  be  made  in  the  highest  degree 
perspicuous. 

Parallel  passages  are  useful  in  explaining  each 
other  by  reason  of  something  being  contained  in 
one  which  is  supplementary  to  the  other.  The  lat- 
ter, in  consequence  of  that  supplement,  is  either 
more  definite  than  the  former,  or  else  by  reason  of 
this  additional  element,  contributes  in  some  other 
way  to  render  the  other  more  definite. 

The  difference  may  consist  in  the  use  of  different 
terms  to  denote  the  same  idea,  in  the  substitution 
of  a  literal  for  a  figurative  expression,  or  of  a  figura- 
tive for  a  literal  one ;  in  an  additional  qualifying 
word,  or  phrase,  or  sentence  ;  in  having  a  relation 
to  a  different  subordinate  or  leading  subject ;  in  be- 
ing made  the  ground  of  a  peculiar  inference,  or  the 
subject  matter  of  a  peculiar  argument.  It  is  in  con- 
sequence only,  of  some  difference  of  this  kind,  that 
parallel  passages  mutually  illustrate  each  other. 

This  difference  therefore,  ought  in  each  case  to  be 
carefully  observed,  and  its  relation  to  what  is  com- 


76  THE    RULES    OR    LAWS    OF 

mon  to  the  passages  compared,  accurately  deter- 
mined. The  first  object  of  comparing  parallel  pas- 
sages, is  to  see  wherein  they  agree,  and  wherein 
they  differ.  Having  ascertained  their  agreement 
and  differences,  we  apply  what  is  peculiar  in  the 
former,  to  explain  the  latter,  and  what  is  peculiar  in 
the  latter,  to  explain  the  former. 

In  comparing  parallel  passages,  the  plain  must  in 
every  case  be  allowed  to  explain  the  obscure  ;  and 
never  the  contrary.  The  error  is  sometimes  com- 
mitted, of  explaining,  in  an  arbitrary  manner,  an  ob- 
scure passage,  and  of  wresting  those  parallel  ones 
which  are  more  plain,  from  their  obvious  import,  in 
order  to  make  them  correspond  with  it,  thus  errone- 
ously interpreted. 

As  far  as  the  meaning  of  words  can  be  fully  deter- 
mined by  other  kinds  of  evidence,  that  of  parallel 
passages  is  unnecessary.  To  resort  to  supposed  or 
real  parallelisms,  for  the  purpose  of  wresting  words 
from  their  plain  and  obvious  import,  is  unreasonable 
and  impious  in  the  extreme.  But  it  is  an  impiety 
not  unfrequently  committed.  It  is  the  favorite  de- 
vice of  false  teachers,  and  one  by  which  thousands 
have  been  deceived.  It  is  a  device  which  is  in  suc- 
cessful operation  at  the  present  time  ;  and  by  which 
not  a  few  are  involved  in  the  most  absurd  and  fatal 
errors. 

Great  accuracy  and  caution  are  requisite  in  every 
department  of  Biblical  Interpretation.  Conjectural 
and  hasty  conclusions  ought  never  to  be  admitted. 
But  in  respect  to  the  comparison  of  parallel  passa- 
ges, and  the  inferences  we  draw  from  such  compar- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  77 

isons,  we  ought  to  be  peculiarly  cautious,  not  to  de- 
ceive ourselves  by  arbitrary  and  conjectural  modes 
of  procedure. 

In  making  use  of  parallelisms  to  ascertain  the 
meaning  of  words,  we  ought  (1.)  to  ascertain  that 
supposed  parallelisms  are  real.  Nothing  but  deci- 
cive  evidence  ought  to  satisfy  us  on  this  point.  All 
those  supposed  parallelisms  which  are  not  supported 
by  such  evidence,  ought  to  be  rejected.  Mere  prob- 
ability is  not  sufficient  for  the  purposes  of  interpre- 
tation,^however  strong  that  probability  may  be. 

(2.)  We  ought  to  ascertain  to  what  extent  the 
passages  compared  are  parallel ;  in  other  words 
what  ideas  common  to  both,  are  alike  obvious  in 
both,  or  at  least  sufficiently  so.  It  is  in  having  some 
obvious  ideas  in  common,  that  parallelism  consists ; 
and  the  parallelism  thus  constituted  is  greater  or  less, 
according  to  the  relative  importance  and  number  of 
those  common  ideas. 

(3.)  We  ought  to  ascertain  with  precision,  what 
is  peculiar  to  each  of  the  parallel  passages  compar- 
ed, and  whether  this  peculiarity  is  in  any  way  defin- 
itive of  their  precise  meaning  ;  also,  what  there  is  in 
one  which  can  be  in  any  way  supplementary  to  the 
other,  or  explanatory  of  it. 

(4.)  We  ought  to  determine  the  bearing  of  what- 
ever is  peculiar  in  each,  on  the  other  passage  ;  in 
what  respect  it  makes  the  meaning  of  any  single 
word,  and  of  the  whole,  either  more  obvious  or  more 
determinate.  Continued  and  patient  attention  is  re- 
quisite in  order  to  our  successful  accomplishment  of 
this  object. 

8 


78  THE   RULES    OR   LAWS   OF 

(5.)  We  ought  to  compare  as  many  passages  as 
possible,  relating  to  every  doubtful  or  difficult  sub- 
ject. The  concentrated  and  continued  light  of  ma- 
ny passages,  is  clearer  and  stronger  than  that  of  only 
a  few.  And  the  true  signification  of  any  important 
word  or  phrase  in  Scripture,  is  that  which  will  be 
sustained  by  an  examination  of  every  parallel  pas- 
sage, where  the  subject  to  which  it  relates  is  pre- 
sented to  view,  or  in  any  way  explained.  If  we  have 
adopted  an  interpretation  that  will  not  abide  the 
test  of  an  extended  comparison  of  this  kind,  we  may 
rest  assured  that  we  have  deceived  ourselves. 

The  leading  controversies  which  have  been  carri- 
ed on  against  the  orthodox  branches  of  the  Christian 
church,  have  been  powerfully  sustained  by  a  per- 
verted use  of  this  mode  of  reasoning,  and  of  this 
source  of  argument.  Many  have  deceived  them- 
selves and  others,  by  assuming  the  existence  of  par- 
allelism where  it  does  not  exist,  and  thus  reason- 
ing in  the  determination  of  the  meaning  of  words, 
upon  premises  that  are  incorrect,  and  that  might,  if 
thoroughly  examined,  be  found  to  rest  on  inconclu- 
sive arguments. 

For  example ;  it  is  necessary  to  compare  exten- 
sively, parallel  passages,  in  order  to  elicit  and  estab- 
lish the  Scripture  doctrine  of  the  general  judgment ; 
or  in  other  words  to  determine  the  precise  and  full 
meaning  of  the  Scripture  language  on  this  subject. 
This  comparison,  if  thoroughly  and  faithfully  prose- 
cuted, is  decisively  indicative  of  the  truth.  But  by 
a  mistake  in  determining  passages  to  be  of  this  class 
which  are  not  so,  an  erroneous  conclusion  respecting 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  79 

the  Bible  doctrine  of  the  final  judgment,  becomes  ea- 
sy and  almost  unavoidable.  Passages  are  often  de- 
cided to  be  parallel  by  superficial  inquirers  on  ac- 
count of  mere  similarity  of  expression,  when  evi- 
dence of  a  similarity  of  object  and  design  is  entirely 
wanting.  In  this  way  those  passages  which  teach 
the  doctrine  of  the  final  judgment,  are  decided  to  be 
parallel  with  those  which  relate  to  the  infliction  of 
only  temporal  judgments,  and  are  explained  by  them 
in  a  manner  which  does  the  utmost  violence  to  the 
established  principles  of  human  language,  reflects 
the  highest  discredit  upon  the  Bible  itself,  and  inflicts 
the  greatest  injury  upon  the  cause  of  practical  and 
experimental  religion. 

The  doctrine  of  the  final  judgment  cannot  be  le- 
gitimately explained  away. 

The  same  error  has  been  committed  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  those  portions  of  the  Scriptures,  which 
relate  to  the  future  punishment  of  the  wicked.  No 
class  of  texts  are  more  explicit  than  these.  They 
are  also  numerous  ;  and  embrace  a  great  variety  of 
expression,  both  in  respect  to  the  literal  and  figura- 
tive announcement  of  the  doctrine  which  they  obvi- 
ously teach.  But  by  classing  them  as  parallel  with 
other  passages  relating  only  to  the  infliction  of  tem- 
poral punishments,  and  explaining  them  according 
to  this  classification,  many  have  succeeded  in  blind- 
ing their  own  minds  to  the  truth,  and  in  deceiving 
others.  Unhappy  success  !  Melancholy  perversion 
both  of  language  and  reason  ! 

In  both  of  the  above  cases,  obvious  and  destructive 
error  has  been  the  result  of  assuming  the  existence 


OU  THE    RULES    OR   LAWS    OF 

of  parallelism,  without  decisive  evidence  of  its  exist- 
ence ;  a  mistake  that  is  wholly  unnecessary,  though 
not  by  any  means  uncommon.  This  erroneous  judg- 
ment being  once  formed  and  established,  may  of- 
ten lead  us  to  the  most  forced  and  unnatural  con- 
structions of  language,  and  plunge  us  into  the  most 
revolting  absurdities,  without  opening  our  eyes  to 
see  the  fallacy  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  our 
reasoning. 

By  a  judicious  comparison  of  parallel  passages 
we  make  the  different  parts  of  the  Bible  explain  each 
other,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  his  own  interpreter.  We 
obtain  access  to  sources  of  evidence  which  are  the 
most  clear  and  convincing. 

The  use  of  parallel  passages  in  detecting  errone- 
ous interpretations,  may  be  still  further  illustrated,  by 
the  application  of  the  rule  under  consideration  to 
those  passages  of  Scripture  which  are  made  the  ba- 
sis of  the  doctrine  of  Christian  perfection. 

The  controversy  respecting  Christian  perfection, 
is  one  that  must  be  settled  by  determining  the  mean- 
ing of  the  words  and  phrases  supposed  to  teach  that 
sentiment. 

The  doctrine  in  question  is  one  which  relates  to 
Christian  character.  What  is  the  Bible  doctrine 
respecting  Christian  character  ?  John  says,  1  John, 
v.  1,  and  18,  "  Whosoever  believeth  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ,  is  born  of  God  ;  That  whosoever  is  born 
of  God  sinneth  not ;"  so  also  1  John,  iii.  9  ;  making 
abstinence  from  sin,  a  characteristic  of  all  true  be- 
lievers and  Christians.  If  these  passages  stood  alone, 
and  were  not  modified  either  by  parallel  passages,  or 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  81 

by  known  truths  from  any  other  source,  we  might  in- 
terpret them  of  sinless  perfection,  or  entire  abstinence 
from  sin,  of  any  kind  or  degree.  But  this  is  not  the 
case.  Their  signification  is  limited  and  modified,  both 
by  parallel  passages  relating  to  Christian  character, 
which  represent  it  as  imperfect ;  and  also  by  observ- 
ation and  experience,  the  observation  and  experi- 
ence of  the  worthiest,  most  intelligent,  and  best  of 
men  ;  and  of  those  who  afford  the  strongest  evidence 
of  having  experienced  a  change  of  heart. 

Of  the  parallel  passages  which  may  be  referred 
to,  for  the  purpose  of  determining  in  what  sense  the 
phrase  "  sinneth  not,"  in  1  John,  v.  18,  is  to  be  un- 
derstood, the  following  are  obvious  and  decisive. 
Phil.  iii.  12.  "  Not  as  though  I  had  already  attain- 
ed, either  were  already  perfect ;"  also,  verses  13, 
14,  and  15,  of  the  same.  Job,  xl.  4,  xlii.  6,  "Be- 
hold I  am  vile  ;  I  abhor  myself,  and  repent  in  dust 
and  ashes ;"  compared  with  Job,  i.  1,  xlii.  7,  "That 
man  was  perfect  and  upright.  Ye  have  not  spoken 
of  me  the  thing  which  is  right,  as  my  servant  Job 
hath." 

If  Paul  was  not  yet  absolutely  perfect,  after  hav- 
ing been  forty  years  in  the  service  of  Christ,  not 
merely  as  an  ordinary  Christian,  but  as  a  wise  master 
builder  ;  if  Job,  though  declared  to  be  a  perfect  and 
upright  man,  could  say  with  truth,  "  Behold,  I  am 
vile  ;  I  abhor  myself,  and  repent  in  dust  and  ashes;11 
then  the  abstinence  from  sin  denoted  by  "  sinneth 
not,11  as  descriptive  of  a  regenerate  state,  is  not  ab- 
solute, but  relative.  The  regenerate  are  all  right- 
eous ;  they  practice  entire  abstinence  from  all  known 
8* 


8^  THE    RULES    OR    LAWS    OF 

sin.     But  they  are  not  all  absolutely  perfect,  as  the 
Scriptures  and  experience  strongly  testify. 

Sec.  6.    Rules  for  determining  when  words 
are  used  in  a  tropical  or  figurative  sense. 

Tropical  or  figurative  language  is  common  to  ev- 
ery department  of  literature,  and  contributes  essen- 
tially to  beauty  and  force  of  expression,  as  well  as 
to  variety.  Some  writers  however,  use  it  sparingly, 
and  others  with  the  greatest  freedom.  It  is  the  life 
of  poetry,  and  one  of  the  indispensable  elements  of 
powerful  and  impassioned  oratory.  The  literal  use 
of  words  is  not  sufficiently  expressive,  to  serve  as  a 
medium  for  the  communication  of  deep  and  excited 
feeling.  The  mind  naturally  gives  them  higher  sen- 
ses, to  suit  the  degree  and  nature  of  its  excitement, 
and  by  this  means  infuses  into  discourse,  a  degree  of 
ardor  and  energy,  which  it  would  otherwise  be  to- 
tally incapable  of  expressing. 

The  words  of  the  Bible  are  designed  to  be  ex- 
pressive of  feeling,  in  all  its  varieties.  Many  por- 
tions of  the  Sacred  Oracles  were  written  under  the 
greatest  possible  excitement,  and  are  themselves  of 
the  most  exciting  character.  It  was  therefore  ne- 
cessary that  the  most  powerful  modes  of  speech 
should  be  adopted  in  those  writings.  This  we  find 
to  have  been  done  with  the  happiest  effect.  The 
Bible  is  the  greatest  and  noblest  repository  of  figu- 
rative language  that  the  world  contains.  The  inter- 
preter of  it  therefore,  ought  to  be  well  acquainted 
with  all  the  leading  principles  and  rules  which  relate 
to  figurative  modes  of  speech.     As  a  prerequisite  to 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  8S 

the  interpretation  of  a  passage,  it  is  sometimes  ne- 
cessary to  determine  whether  any  part  is  figurative 
or  not ;  and  how  far  it  is  to  be  considered  as  sustain- 
ing this  character.  This  problem  is  sometimes  a 
matter  of  considerable  difficulty.  The  following 
rules  may  be  of  service  in  determining  it. 

1.  Necessity.  In  the  interpretation  of  language,  the 
literal  meaning  of  words  ought  never  to  be  departed 
from,  without  evident  reason  and  necessity.  To  ex- 
plain words  in  a  tropical  or  figurative  sense,  because 
they  are  sometimes,  or  even  frequently  used  so,  is  in 
any  case  entirely  unauthorized.  It  is  an  entire  depart- 
ure from  the  established  principles  of  language,  and 
a.  gross  perversion  of  reason. 

No  intelligent  writer  departs  from  the  literal  sig- 
nification of  words,  without  giving  unequivocal  in- 
dications of  the  fact.  In  the  absence  of  decisive  ev- 
idence, that  a  word  is  used  in  a  tropical  or  figurative 
sense,  we  have  no  right  to  suppose  this  is  the  case ; 
but  have  reason  to  believe  the  contrary. 

The  fact  that  a  word  will  admit  of  being  interpret- 
ed fig  uratively,  and  yet  express  in  our  apprehension, 
a  consistent  sense,  is  not  a  sufficient  reason  for  in- 
terpreting it  so.  It  ought  not  to  admit  of  a  different 
interpretation,  without  doing  evident  violence  to  the 
context,  in  order  to  establish  its  claim  to  a  tropical 
or  figurative  sense. 

Such  is  always  the  case  with  words  that  are  real- 
ly figurative.  They  cannot,  without  inconsistency, 
be  interpreted  in  their  literal  senses.  Those  senses 
therefore,  ought  not  to  be  forced  upon  them. 

2.  Incongruity.    What  constitutes  a  necessity  for 


84  THE   RULES    OR   LAWS   OF 

departing,  in  our  interpretation  of  language,  from 
the  literal  and  established  meaning  of  words,  and  ex- 
plaining them  in  tropical  significations,  is  a  manifest 
incongruity  between  the  subject  and  attribute,  or 
the  apparent  subject,  and  what  is  asserted  respect- 
ing I  he  real  one. 

This  occurs  wherever  words  which  are  the  appro- 
priate and  known  symbols  of  one  class  of  objects 
and  relations,  are  applied  to  denote  those  of  another. 
For  example  ;  Christ  is  the  true  vine  ;  the  living 
bread  ;  the  lamb  of  God.  Here  the  names  of  inan- 
imate objects  are  applied  to  designate  Christ,  an  an- 
imate one.  Considered  in  respect  to  their  literal 
senses,  there  is  a  manifest  incongruity  between  the 
words  which  enter  into  these  assertions  ;  but  inter- 
preted figuratively,  their  meaning  is  plain  and  con- 
sistent. 

In  accordance  with  this  rule,  whenever  words  ap- 
propriated to  corporeal  objects,  are  applied  to  incor- 
poreal ones,  or  those  appropriated  to  animate  objects, 
are  applied  to  inanimate,  or  those  appropriated  to  ra- 
tional objects,  are  applied  to  irrational,  &c.  or  the 
contrary,  of  these  several  cases,  and  of  others  like 
them  ;  the  words  so  applied,  are  always  to  be  under- 
stood as  tropical.  The  Lord  is  my  rock,  my  fortress  ; 
burning  wrath,  fiery  indignation,  raging  tempest, 
roaring  ocean,  smiling  spring,  are  examples  to  which 
this  rule  manifestly  applies,  and  by  which,  as  by  a 
multitude  of  analogous  ones,  to  be  met  with  on  all 
sides,  it  is  fully  illustrated. 

The  faithful  and  judicious  application  of  this  rule 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  85 

would  correct  many  hurtful  errors,  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  tropical  language  of  the  Bible. 

3.  A  definitive  clause.  When  the  tropical  sense  of 
a  word  or  phrase,  is  not  indicated  by  other  means, 
this  is  often  done  by  the  use  of  a  definitive  clause, 
showing  both  that  the  literal  sense  is  not  intended, 
and  making  a  tropical  interpretation  necessary.  The 
Bible  abounds  in  examples  of  this  kind  ;  of  which, 
yoke  of  bondage  ;  being  dead  in  sin  ;  being  born  of 
the  Spirit,  are  a  specimen.  In  each  of  these  cases, 
the  explanatory  clause  requires  the  word  to  which  it 
relates,  to  be  interpreted,  not  in  a  literal,  but  in  a 
tropical  sense. 

4.  Literal  disagreement  of  parallel  passages.  The 
Bible  presents  to  our  consideration  many  subjects 
that  are  entirely  removed  from  the  sphere  of  human 
observation,  and  also  from  that  of  the  senses.  Our 
knowledge  of  the  nature  and  attributes  of  those  sub- 
jects, must  depend  entirely  upon  an  interpretation  of 
the  language  by  which  they  are  described.  When 
such  a  subject  is  set  forth  by  the  use  of  terms  of 
entirely  and  manifestly  different  and  incongruous 
meanings,  we  may  conclude  with  certainty,  that 
some  of  those  terms  are  to  be  interpreted  in  tropical 
senses.  This  rule  is  applicable  to  those  Scripture 
representations,  which  have  respect  to  the  change 
that  takes  place  in  the  human  soul,  on  our  becoming 
pious.  It  is  expressed  in  Scripture  by  terms  of  dif- 
ferent and  incongruous  import.  Being  born  again  ; 
being  born  of  water,  and  of  the  Spirit ;  being  crea- 
ted anew  ;    being  sanctified  ;   becoming  united  to 


86  THE   RULES    OR   LAWS    OF 

Christ;  repenting  and  being  converted  ;  are  some  of 
the  terms  by  which  this  change  is  indicated. 

The  application  of  them  to  denote  the  same  thing, 
cannot  be  justified  on  any  other  supposition  than 
that  some  of  them  are  used  in  tropical  senses.  They 
cannot  be  harmoniously  explained  on  any  other 
principle.  On  this  principle  the  explanation  of  them 
is  easy  end  natural,  and  their  signification  both  con- 
sistent and  obvious. 

5.  Literal  agreement  of  parallel  passages.  In  those 
cases  where  the  same  words,  or  those  of  similar  im- 
port are  in  different  parallel  passages  uniformly 
used  to  designate  the  same  subject,  and  are  other- 
wise unexplained,  we  may  confidently  infer  that  they 
ought  to  be  interpreted  literally.  Those  passages 
of  Scripture  which  relate  to  the  future  and  eternal 
punishment  of  the  wicked,  are  of  this  class.  That 
part  of  the  Divine  procedure  is  represented  by  vari- 
ous terms  and  modes  of  expression,  all  of  which  un- 
equivocally denote  suffering,  from  which  we  infer, 
with  confidence,  that  real  suffering  is  intended,  and 
that  literal  punishment  will  be  inflicted  on  all  the 
finally  impenitent. 

The  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body, 
stands  on  a  similar  foundation.  It  is  referred  to  in 
various  passages  of  Scripture,  and  by  various  modes 
of  expression,  all  of  which  indicate  the  same  thing, 
and  agree  in  expressing  substantially  the  same  liter- 
al sense.  Thus  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  ;  of  the 
body  ;  being  quickened  or  made  alive,  &,c.  are  ex- 
pressions in  constant  Scriptural  use,  in  reference  to 
a  future  and  important  event,  which,  we  conclude 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION  87 

from  this  uniformity  of  expression  in  relation  to  it, 
can  be  nothing  less  than  a  literal  resurrection  of  the 
bodies  of  all  the  dead. 

This  rule  is  an  important  barrier,  operating  in  con- 
junction with  other  principles  of  language,  to  check 
the  undue  extention  of  tropical  interpretations.  In 
reference  to  subjects  concerning  which  we  have 
opportunities  of  accurate  information  from  other 
sources,  there  is  not  much  room  for  an  undue  ex- 
tension of  tropical  interpretations.  The  subject  it- 
self, in  such  cases,  contributes  to  define  the  language 
used  respecting  it.  But  where  there  are  no  other 
sources  of  satisfactory  information,  a  principle  of  this 
kind  is  necessary  to  facilitate  correct  decisions  re- 
specting the  mode  of  interpretation  proper  to  be 
adopted. 

Sec  7.     Rules  for  determining  the  sense  of 
tropical  or  figurative  words. 

Tropical  language  is  constructed  on  the  same  prin- 
ciples as  that  which  is  strictly  literal.  Consequent- 
ly the  methods  of  determining  the  sense  of  tropical 
words,  are  substantially  the  same  as  those  which 
have  been  pointed  out.  We  have  not  one  set  of 
rules  for  determining  the  literal  sense  of  words,  and 
another  entirely  different,  for  the  determination 
of  their  tropical  senses ;  but  we  have,  for  the  most 
part,  what  is  far  better,  one  set  of  rules  applicable 
to  the  determination  of  the  sense  of  words  in  both 
cases. 

The  peculiar  difficulties  however,  which  some- 
times attend  the  application  of  these  rules  to  tropic- 


88  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

al  language,  and  the  frequent  errors  that  are  com- 
mitted in  this  department  of  Interpretation,  seem  to 
indicate  the  propriety  of  a  few  remarks,  particularly 
on  this  subject,  with  a  view  to  facilitate  the  applica- 
tion of  principles  which  have  been  for  the  most  part 
already  explained. 

1.  The  peculiar  character  of  the  tropical  express- 
ions. The  different  classes  of  tropical  words,  ought 
to  be  interpreted  according  to  their  respective  char- 
acters. Metaphors  ought  to  be  interpreted  as  met- 
aphors, in  a  metaphorical  sense  ;  allegories,  as  alle- 
gories, in  an  allegorical  sense;  hyperbole  and  irony, 
with  due  consideration  of  the  nature  of  those  modes 
of  speech.  Each  of  these  classes  of  words  have  a 
true  sense,  that  is  indicated  by  the  nature  of  the  class 
to  which  it  belongs. 

In  order  to  the  due  observance  of  this  rule,  it  is 
necessary  carefully  to  distinguish  figurative  language 
from  that  which  is  literal,  and  also  the  different  class- 
es of  figurative  expressions  from  each  other  Such 
discrimination  is  not  always  necessary,  but  it  is  al- 
ways useful  in  promoting  clearness  and  accuracy  of 
perception,  and  is  sometimes  indispensable  to  the 
correct  interpretation  of  figurative  language. 

2.  Established  and  known  usage.  Established 
usage,  both  general  and  particular,  is  a  certain  rule 
by  which  to  determine  the  meaning  of  tropical 
words.  Where  this  is  known,  and  in  the  absence  of 
internal  evidence  to  the  contrary,  it  is  always  to  be 
observed.  General  usage  is  the  first  and  highest  rule. 
When  that  is  uniform,  and  not  modified  or  contra- 
dicted by  a  known  particular  usage,  or  by  internal 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  89 

t 

evidence,  it  is  a  clear  and  certain  indication  of  the 
sense  intended.  When  a  known  particular  usage 
supervenes,  as  belonging  uniformly  to  the  subject 
treated  of,  or  to  the  author  whose  treatise  we  are  in- 
vestigating, that  takes  the  place  of  general  usage, 
and  is  equally  decisive  of  the  sense  intended. 

General  usage  in  respect  to  the  tropical  sense  of 
words,  is  remarkably  uniform  with  all  good  writers. 
It  is  capable  of  being  accurately  known  to  an  extent 
which,  to  the  superficial  inquirer,  is  altogether  in- 
credible. Being  known,  it  sheds  a  degree  of  light 
on  this  department  of  Interpretation,  which  renders 
it  generally  perspicuous  and  satisfactory  to  the  dili- 
gent and  attentive  inquirer. 

The  sacred  writers,  though  distinguished  by  sev- 
eral important  and  obvious  peculiarities,  still  have 
many  equally  important  and  known  points  of  resem- 
blance to  others,  in  respect  to  the  use  of  tropical  lan- 
guage. Besides,  they  are  peculiarly  harmonious  in 
this  respect,  among  themselves.  The  later  writers 
having  in  every  case  an  intimate  acquaintance  with 
the  writings  of  those  who  preceded  them,  adopted  the 
same  modes  of  expression,  and,  to  a  great  extent, 
the  same  peculiarities  of  style.  This  circumstance 
contributes  essentially  to  the  perspicuity  of  the  Sa- 
cred Oracles  generally,  but  particularly  so  in  respect 
to  those  parts  of  the  Bible  that  are  of  a  tropical  or 
figurative  character. 

The  same  words  are  generally  used  in  the  same 
tropical  senses,  by  different  sacred  writers,  from  the 
earliest  to  the  latest.    Each  successive  sacred  wri- 
9 


90  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

ter  seems  in  this  respect  to  approbate  the  usages  of 
his  predecessors,  and  conform  to  them. 

The  same  word  not  unfrequently  has  different 
tropical  significations,  equally  well  established,  and 
of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  language  of  the  same 
writer,  as  well  as  in  that  of  different  writers. 

Light,  for  example,  is  frequently  used  metaphoric- 
ally by  the  sacred  writers,  to  denote,  (1,)  happiness 
and  prosperity ;  (2,)  glory  and  honor ;  (3,)  truth  ; 
(4,)  knowledge ;  (5,)  piety  and  virtue. 

Darkness  is  a  Scriptural  metaphor,  which  denotes, 
(1,)  misery,  adversity  ;  (2.)  ignorance,  error  ;  (3,)  sin, 
impurity. 

Fire  is  a  Scriptural  metaphor,  which  denotes,  (1,) 
holiness,  justice  ;  (2,)  the  author  or  cause  of  purifi- 
cation, of  moral  renovation  and  improvement  of 
character  ;  (3,)  the  author  or  cause  of  misery  or  ad- 
versity ;  (4.)  misery  or  adversity  however  produced ; 
(5,)  the  miseries  of  hell. 

When  a  word  has  different  established  metaphor- 
ical significations,  it  often  requires  careful  attention 
and  study,  to  determine  which  is  intended.  Serious 
mistakes  in  this  department,  of  Interpretation,  are  of 
frequent  occurrence.  In  all  such  cases,  other  prin- 
ciples besides  general  usage,  must  be  referred  to,  for 
a  decision  respecting  the  true  meaning  expressed  in 
each  particular  case. 

3.  Other  subsidiary  and  general  principles  of  trop- 
ical Interpretation.  Where  the  general  meaning  of 
a  metaphor  or  other  tropical  word  is  unknown,  or 
where  the  same  expression  has  more  than  one  es- 
tablished meaning,  its  signification  in  any  particular 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  91 

case,  must  be  defined  by  some  other  of  the  known 
principles  of  language.  Such  explanation  is  required 
of  every  good  writer  ;  and  is  seldom  sought  in  vain, 
by  the  attentive  and  intelligent  reader.  These  sub- 
sidiary principles  of  Interpretation  comprehend  (1,) 
logical  definitions  by  the  use  of  synonymous  terms, 
or  otherwise ;  (2,)  the  known  nature  of  the  subject 
treated  of;  (3,)  the  obvious  purpose  and  design  of 
the  writer ;  (4,)  the  position  of  the  tropical  express- 
ion in  the  sentence  or  paragraph  ;  (5,)  the  context ; 
(6,)  examples  of  the  thing  signified  ;  (7,)  compari- 
sons by  which  the  sense  is  illustrated  ;  (8,)  antithet- 
ical clauses  ;  (9,)  parallel  passages. 

All  these  are  of  occasional,  and  some  of  them  of 
frequent  use,  in  the  interpretation  of  the  tropical  lan- 
guage of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

The  known  nature  of  the  subject  to  which  the 
tropical  word  relates,  the  context,  and  a  comparison 
of  parallel  passages,  ought  never  to  be  neglected,  in 
determining  the  sense  of  tropical  words.  They  ex- 
ert a  principal,  and  almost  universal  agency,  in 
making  language  generally,  and  this  no  less  than 
other  modes  of  speech,  of  a  determinate  character. 
Precision  and  accuracy  cannot  be  given  to  our  ex- 
pressions by  any  other  means,  to  the  exclusion  of 
these.  They  are  the  universal  auxiliaries  of  the  in- 
terpreter, and  indications  of  the  true  sense  of  words 
that  accompany  human  discourse,  in  all  its  varieties, 
and  through  all  its  windings. 

4.  A  substitution  of  equivalent  literal,  for  figurative 
expressions.  We  often  suppose  ourselves  to  be  in 
possession  of  the  true  sense  of  tropical  expressions, 


92  THE    RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

when  this  is  not  the  case.  The  endeavor  therefore, 
to  substitute  equivalent  literal  expressions,  in  the 
place  of  those  which  are  figurative,  is  useful  in  sev- 
eral respects  ;  (1,)  as  a  means  of  indicating  to  our- 
selves how  far  we  attach  any  definite  sense  to  the 
expression  in  question  ;  (2,)  as  a  means  of  facilitating 
the  comparison  of  the  sense  in  which  we  understand 
a  given  figurative  expression,  with  what  we  know 
of  any  established  usage  in  respect  to  the  case  ;  the 
known  nature  of  the  subject,  the  obvious  purpose 
and  design  of  the  writer,  or  whatever  other  principle 
may  legitimately  apply. 

The  following  attempts  to  convert  figurative  into 
literal  expressions  of  similar  import,  may  serve  the 
purpose  of  illustrating  this  rule,  and  of  indicating  to 
those  who  are  unexperienced  in  this  exercise,  some- 
thing of  its  importance. 

"  I  am  the  vine,  ye  are  the  branches.'"  John  xv. 
5  ;  literally,  I  am  related  to  you  as  the  vine  is  rela- 
ted to  its  branches  ;  that  is,  by  an  intimate  and  vital 
relation. 

"This  is  the  condemnation,  that  light  is  come 
into  the  world,  and  men  loved  darkness  rather  than 
light,  because  their  deeds  were  evil."  Here  are  sev- 
eral tropical  expressions  blended  together.  Con- 
demnation denotes  by  metonymy,  the  cause  of  con- 
demnation. Light  is  used  metaphorically,  to  denote 
religious  knowledge  or  instruction.  Darkness  is  al- 
so a  metaphor,  the  antithesis  of  light,  and  signifying 
the  opposite  ;  namely,  corrupt  religious  sentiment  or 
belief,  ignorance  and  error. 

Translated  into  literal  expressions,  as  here  explain- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  93 

ed,  the  passage  would  read  ;  This  is  the  cause  of  con- 
demnation, that  religious  knowledge  is  come  into  the 
world,  and  men  loved  error  rather  than  knowledge, 
because  their  deeds  were  evil. 

In  substitutions  of  this  kind,  it  will  generally  be 
found  difficult  to  equal  the  energy  and  expressive- 
ness of  the  figurative  representation.  Figurative 
language,  whenever  correctly  used,  is  more  express- 
ive than  any  literal  expressions  of  the  same  signifi- 
cation. Its  superiority  is  often  strikingly  evinced 
by  an  endeavor  to  form  literal  expressions  equally 
significant  of  the  same  ideas.  But  though  there  are 
many  cases  in  which  the  sense  of  tropical  express- 
ions cannot  be  fully  indicated  by  any  corresponding 
literal  announcement  of  the  same,  there  may,  in  ev- 
ery case  that  is  correctly  and  perfectly  understood, 
be  a  substitution,  that  shall  be  sufficiently  exact,  to 
verify  the  interpretation. 

Sec  8.   Rules  for  determining  the  significa- 
tion  OF   ALLEGORIES. 

The  application  of  allegories  to  purposes  of  in- 
struction and  argument,  has  been  extensively  prac- 
ticed both  by  the  sacred  writers  and  by  others.  Sev- 
eral beautiful  allegories  occur  in  the  Old  Testament. 
In  the  discourses  of  our  Savior  they  abound.  The 
allegories  of  the  Bible  are  of  unparalleled  beauty  and 
excellence.  They  contribute  much  to  enhance  the 
value  of  the  Sacred  Oracles,  and  to  increase  the  en- 
ergy and  beauty  of  those  portions  of  Scripture  in 
which  they  occur,  and  of  those  exhibitions  of  truth 
to  which  they  belong. 

9* 


94  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

Allegorical  illustrations  are  peculiarly  adapted  to 
encounter  prejudice  and  perverse  opposition  of  feel- 
ing, and  are  generally  resorted  to  for  that  purpose 
in  the  Scriptures. 

Our  Savior  discoursed  much  to  his  numerous  and 
miscellaneous  auditors,  in  parables.  The  reason  of 
his  doing  this,  was,  that  the  perceptions  of  the  peo- 
ple were  so  dull,  and  their  prejudices  against  evan- 
gelical truth,  and  their  perverseness  of  heart  so  great, 
that  they  could  not  have  been  so  effectually  reached 
and  instructed,  in  any  other  way.  He  did  not  speak 
in  parables  for  the  purpose  of  concealing  the  truth 
from  his  hearers,  but  for  that  of  making  his  revela- 
tion of  it  effectual,  in  the  highest  possible  degree. 
This  mode  of  instruction  is  adapted  to  the  weakest 
capacities.  It  is  peculiarly  suited  to  the  ignorant, 
the  stupid,  and  unreasonable. 

For  the  considerate,  discerning,  and  unprejudiced, 
it  is  not  particularly  necessary.  They  are  prepared 
to  receive  instruction  by  the  more  direct  and  simple 
modes  of  presentation  ;  and  in  dealing  with  them, 
such  modes  have  been  adopted  by  God,  as  they 
generally  are  by  men. 

Allegories,  however,  are  not  without  their  uses  to 
all.  This  is  particularly  true  of  those  contained  in 
the  Bible.  They  are  adapted  to  attract  the  attention 
and  inform  the  mind  of  the  wayfaring  man,  though 
a  fool,  and  also  to  administer  to  the  improvement  of 
the  purest,  loftiest,  and  most  cultivated  minds. 

The  general  rules  for  determining  the  sense  of 
words,  apply  equally  to  allegorical  representations. 
In  its  internal  structure,  an  allegory  does  not  differ 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  95 

essentially  from  any  other  narrative  ;  and  its  literal 
sense  is  to  be  determined  by  the  same  rules  as  that 
of  any  other  species  of  narratives.  But  the  facts 
which  constitute  an  allegorical  representation,  have 
a  higher  and  analogical  meaning,  which  is  the  ap- 
propriate signification  of  the  allegory,  as  such.  Ev- 
ery word  in  the  allegory  may  be  rightly  interpreted, 
and  not  a  glimpse  of  this  be  obtained. 

1.  In  the  interpretation  of  allegories,  the  first  thing 
to  be  done,  is  to  ascertain  the  purpose  or  design  with 
which  they  were  spoken.  A  knowledge  of  the  pur- 
pose and  design  of  any  discourse,  is  often  of  great 
use  in  assisting  our  apprehension  of  its  true  sense. 
But  it  is  particularly  important  in  the  interpretation 
of  allegories.  Any  further  than  we  can  ascertain 
the  design  of  an  allegory,  it  is  impossible  that  we 
should  understand  it. 

The  design  of  the  allegories  of  the  Bible,  is  gener- 
ally indicated  unequivocally  in  the  context.  Some- 
times it  is  directly  asserted,  and  sometimes  evinced 
by  indirect  and  circumstantial  evidence. 

To  interpret  an  allegory  without  any  regard  to 
its  design  as  indicated  in  the  context,  and  inconsist- 
ently with  that  design,  is  to  act  in  a  most  arbitrary 
manner.  Such  interpretations  are  utterly  fanciful, 
and  universally  erroneous.  A  Scripture  allegory 
sustains  a  relation  to  some  subject  pointed  out  in  the 
context,  or  by  other  means,  similar  to  that  of  an  ar- 
gument to  a  proposition,  which  it  is  designed  to 
prove  or  enforce.  The  two  are  joined  together  by 
a  tie  that  cannot  be  sundered,  in  our  apprehensions, 
without  producing  obscurity.     Such  is  the  relation 


96  THE    RULES    OR   LAWS    OF 

of  a  Scripture  allegory  to  some  particular  subject, 
which  it  is  designed  to  illustrate,  that  it  must  be  con- 
templated in  its  relation  to  that  subject,  in  order  to  be 
understood. 

2.  The  different  and  prominent  parts  of  an  allego- 
ry ought  to  be  explained  in  accordance  with  the 
main  design.  In  most  cases  the  Scripture  allegories 
are  introduced  to  illustrate  a  subject  in  some  particu- 
lar aspect,  or  in  reference  to  some  particular  point. 
The  illustration  of  that  point  is  the  main  design,  and 
the  whole  allegory  is  constructed  with  a  view  to  the 
most  successful  accomplishment  of  that  object.  For 
example  ;  the  parable  of  the  prodigal  son,  and  some 
others,  were  spoken  to  silence  the  clamors  of  the 
scribes  and  Pharisees  against  Christ,  because  he  re- 
ceived the  company  of  sinners,  and  associated  con- 
descendingly and  kindly  with  them.  Luke  xv.  1.  2. 
The  direct  object  of  it  was  to  illustrate  the  conde- 
scension and  kindness  of  God  in  respect  to  all  that 
repent  of  their  sins,  and  engage  heartily  in  the  per- 
formance of  their  religious  duties. 

The  parable  of  the  good  Samaritan,  Luke  x.  30— 
35,  was  spoken  to  illustrate  the  duty  of  universal 
kindness  and  well  doing.  The  prominent  parts  of 
both  these  parables  ought  to  be  interpreted  in  cor- 
respondence with  the  purposes  they  were  respect- 
ively designed  to  answer.  The  same  is  equally  true 
of  all  allegorical  representations.  Considered  in  re- 
spect to  the  main  design  for  which  they  are  intro- 
duced, every  allegory  ought  to  be  interpreted  as  a 
whole,  and  not  merely  as  a  collection  of  independ- 
ent illustrations. 


BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION.  D7 

3.  As  the  allegory  is  Founded  on  resemblance,  a 
perception  of  those  qualities  which  are  common  both 
to  the  subject  of  the  narrative,  considered  as  a  nar- 
rative, and  to  that  designed  to  be  illustrated  by  it,  is 
necessary  to  a  right  understanding  of  the  allegory. 

In  determining  the  points  of  resemblance  in  an  al- 
legory, we  have  need  of  great  caution,  not  to  multi- 
ply them  too  much  ;  nor  to  diminish  them  too  much  ; 
nor  to  substitute  erroneous  ones  in  the  place  of  those 
which  are  true  and  real.  No  two  objects,  even  of 
the  some  class,  resemble  each  other  in  every  partic- 
ular. Still  less  is  this  the  fact,  in  respect  to  objects 
of  different  classes.  Material  and  temporal  objects 
and  relations,  have  some  points  of  resemblance  to 
those  which  are  spiritual  and  eternal.  These  points 
may  be  obvious  and  striking.  They  often  are.  But 
the  resemblance  is  in  no  case  perfect.  While  there 
may  be  ten  points  of  agreement,  and  ten  qualities  in 
common  between  a  particular  temporal  and  spiritual 
object,  there  are  perhaps  as  many  more,  in  which 
they  disagree,  and  by  which  they  differ  from  each 
other. 

The  subject  and  circumstances  of  an  allegory  are 
justly  supposed  to  have  some  things  in  common  with 
the  related  subject  and  circumstances  intended  to  be 
illustrated  by  it.  These  common  properties  consti- 
tute resemblance.  What  they  are,  we  ought  to  as- 
certain with  as  much  precision  as  possible. 

Multiplying  supposed  points  of  resemblance,  in 
cases  of  this  kind,  is  a  common  fault,  and  is  general- 
ly and  correctly  termed,  pressing  the  analogy  too 
far. 


98  THE   RULES   OR   LAWS   OF 

4.  The  foregoing  rules  for  the  interpretation  of  al- 
legories, may  be  illustrated  by  the  following  exam- 
ple.   Luke  xviii.  2 — 8. 

"  There  was  in  a  city,  a  judge  which  feared  not 
God,  neither  regarded  man.  And  there  was  a 
widow  in  that  city,  and  she  came  unto  him,  saying, 
avenge  me  of  mine  adversary.  And  he  would  not,  for 
a  while,  but  afterward  he  said  within  himself,  though 
I  fear  not  God,  nor  regard  man,  yet  because  this 
widow  troubleth  me,  I  will  avenge  her,  lest  by  her 
continual  coming,  she  weary  me.  And  the  Lord 
said,  hear  what  the  unjust  judge  saith.  And  shall 
not  God  avenge  his  own  elect  that  cry  day  and  night 
to  him,  though  he  bear  long  with  them?  I  tell  you 
he  will  avenge  them  speedily." 

(1.)  As  to  the  design  or  purpose  of  this  parable. 

This  is  explicitly  asserted  in  the  context ;  "  That 
men  ought  always  to  pray,  and  not  to  faint.'1 

(2.)  As  to  the  relation  of  the  prominent  parts  of 
the  allegorical  narrative  to  the  main  design. 

The  poor  widow,  asking  redress  of  a  judge  or  gov- 
ernor, represents  a  sinner  asking  favors  of  God. 
Both  are  alike  helpless,  needy  and  dependent. 

The  success  of  the  widow's  importunity,  repre- 
sents that  of  sinners  in  importunate  prayer  to  God. 
It  is  manifestly  designed  to  encourage  men  to  be 
both  importunate  and  believing,  in  their  cries  to  God 
for  mercy  and  protection. 

The  fact  that  the  judge  was  unjust,  neither  fear- 
ing God  nor  regarding  man,  renders  the  case  pecul- 
iarly strong  and  encouraging.  If  being  of  such  a 
character,  he  could  be  induced  to  yield  to  the  impor- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  99 

tunity  of  a  feeble  and  defenseless  widow,  whom  he 
cared  nothing  about,  how  much  more  will  a  just  and 
gracious  God,  who  cherishes  a  tender  and  fatherly 
care  of  all  his  creatures,  listen  to  the  unceasing  crie3 
of  his  own  children,  and  grant  all  their  reasonable 
requests. 

(3.)  This  parable  is  an  instance  in  which  the  anal- 
ogy between  the  allegorical  narration,  and  the  things 
represented  by  it,  holds  only  to  a  manifestly  limited 
extent.  The  design  of  the  parable,  and  the  nature 
of  the  subject  illustrated  by  it,  indicate  with  sufficient 
clearness,  what  the  points  of  resemblance  are.  The 
judge  represents  God,  in  respect  to  authority  and 
power,  but  not  in  respect  to  personal  character.  His 
yielding  to  the  importunity  of  the  widow,  corresponds 
to  God's  yielding  to  the  importunate  cries  of  his  chil- 
dren, in  respect  to  the  bestowment  of  the  thing  de- 
sired, but  not  in  respect  to  the  reason  of  its  bestow- 
ment. The  judge  complied  with  the  widow's  re- 
quest to  avoid  trouble,  God  answers  the  prayers  of 
bis  children  to  do  them  good. 


CHAPTER  III. 
SUBSIDIARY  AND  PARTICULAR  LAWS   OF  BIBLICAL  Iff- 

terpretation. 

Sec.   1.    The    interpretation    of    the    scrip- 
tural  SYSTEM   OF   DOCTRINES. 

The  word  doctrine  is  derived  from  a  word  which 
signifies  to  teach  ;  and  denotes  whatever  is  commu- 
nicated as  an  article  of  faith.  In  its  most  compre- 
hensive sense,  it  embraces  both  truth  and  error,  and 
is  nearly  synonymous  with  opinion.  Thus  we  speak 
of  the  doctrines  of  Plato,  of  Aristotle,  of  Confucius, 
and  of  Mohammed,  as  well  as  of  the  doctrines  of 
Christ,  and  of  true  religion. 

This  word  however,  is  generally  used  in  a  more 
restricted  sense,  to  denote  the  Biblical  system  of  re- 
ligious and  moral  truth.  In  this  sense  the  word  doc- 
trine is  synonymous  with  religious  belief,  or  religious 
sentiment ;  and  is  discriminated  from  historical  or 
prophetical  announcements,  considered  merely  as 
such.  Whatever  is  taught  in  the  Bible,  on  religious 
and  moral  subjects,  properly  belongs  to  its  doctrines. 
To  exhibit  and  enforce  these,  is  the  great  object  for 
which  the  Bible  was  given.  From  these,  it  derives 
its  principal  value  ;  and  by  means  of  them,  works 
those  mighty  transformations  of  character,  by  which 
sinners  are  converted,  and  prepared  for  heaven. 
The  religious  doctrines  of  the  Bible  comprehend 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  101 

all  those  sentiments  and  opinions  which  are  there 
inculcated,  respecting  the  subject  of  religion  ;  a  vast 
collection  of  revealed  truth.  Biblical  Interpretation 
embraces  of  course,  the  investigation  of  all  those  pas- 
sages, in  which  religious  truth  is  contained.  A  right 
interpretation  of  those  passages  is  all  that  we  want 
to  put  us  in  possession  of  the  doctrines  they  commu- 
nicate. Correct  interpretation  therefore,  is  the  ave- 
nue to  correct  religious  doctrine. 

No  man  studies  the  Bible  in  a  right  manner,  who 
does  not  study  it  with  a  special  view  to  ascertain  its 
doctrines.  If  we  understand  the  doctrines  of  the 
Bible,  we  understand  the  Bible  ;  otherwise  not.  Ev- 
ery new  doctrine  we  learn  is  a  substantial  and  valu- 
able addition  to  our  Biblical  knowledge.  All  have 
something  to  learn  in  this  department  of  truth.  The 
field  of  Scripture  doctrine  is  of  almost  unlimited  ex- 
tent. It  has  never  yet  been  fully  explored  by  any 
human  mind.  It  probably  never  will  be  in  this 
world. 

The  only  proper  method  of  determining  what  the 
doctrines  of  the  Bible  are,  is  by  interpretation.  They 
cannot  be  guessed  out.  Human  invention  is  not 
adequate  to  the  task  of  discovering  them  by  the  dim 
light  of  natural  reason.  By  the  laws  of  Interpreta- 
tion they  can  be  determined  with  accuracy  and  pre- 
cision. Let  these  laws,  as  far  as  they  have  already 
been  explained,  be  faithfully  applied,  and  the  great 
body  of  Christian  doctrine  will  be  clearly  developed. 
As  the  subject  of  doctrinal  interpretation  however, 
is  one  of  peculiar  interest,  and  in  some  respects  of 
peculiar  difficulty,  it  may  not  be  unprofitable  to  illus- 
10 


102  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

trate  the  following  additional  principles  of  Doctrinal 
Interpretation. 

1.  Observation  and  experience.  As  far  as  the 
Scriptures  relate  to  subjects  which  come  within  the 
sphere  of  our  personal  observation,  we  ought  to 
study  those  subjects  directly  in  connexion  with  the 
Scripture  doctrines  which  relate  to  them.  We  ought 
to  study  facts  as  they  present  themselves  to  our  per- 
sonal observation,  in  connexion  with  the  inspired  ex- 
positions of  them. 

The  doctrines  of  the  Bible  concerning  human  de- 
pravity, regeneration  by  the  Holy-Spirit,  the  progres- 
sive sanctification  of  believers,  &c.  are  of  this  class. 
They  are  all  matters  of  experience  and  observation. 
The  material  facts  in  respect  to  each  of  them,  be- 
long to  real  life,  as  truly  as  they  do  to  the  doctrinal 
announcements  of  the  Scriptures. 

The  doctrinal  views  communicated  in  the  Bible, 
were  intended  to  be  understood  and  explained  ac- 
cording to  all  the  obvious  facts  to  be  met  with  in  hu- 
man observation  and  experience,  relating  to  the 
same  subjects. 

In  giving  us  the  light  of  revelation,  God  never  de- 
signed to  supercede  that  of  human  observation  and 
experience.  His  instructions  are  supplementary  to 
those  of  perception  and  reason.  Observation  and 
enlightened  reason  are  necessary  to  an  understand- 
ing of  all  the  higher  doctrines  of  Divine  revelation, 
relating  to  their  appropriate  objects. 

Facts  that  come  within  the  sphere  of  human  ob- 
servation, are  the  natural  interpreters  of  all  inspired 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  103 

communications,  to  the  subjects  of  which  they  re- 
late. 

Many  Scripture  doctrines  relate  so  directly  to 
those  states  of  mind  which  are  matters  of  human 
consciousness,  that  they  cannot  be  fully  understood 
without  becoming  matters  of  experience.  This  oc- 
curs in  conformity  with  a  general  principle  of  human 
language. 

All  the  elements  of  human  knowledge,  have  their 
appropriate  channels  of  access  to  the  mind,  and  are 
incapable  of  being  attained  by  any  other  means. 
Colors  must  be  viewed  by  the  eye,  sound  appreciated 
by  the  ear,  and  all  the  elementary  feelings  and  states 
of  mind,  ascertained  by  consciousness.  Consequent- 
ly those  Scripture  doctrines  which  relate  to  the  ob- 
jects of  human  consciousness,  must  be  interpreted 
experimentally,  in  order  to  be  interpreted  aright. 

A  blind  man  may  as  well  theorize  about  colors, 
or  a  deaf  man  respecting  sound,  as  any  man  inter- 
pret the  Scripture  expositions  relative  to  peculiar 
elementary  states  of  mind,  who  has  not  experienced 
in  some  degree,  the  .same.  The  attempt  to  deter- 
mine accurately  the  subjects  of  human  conscious- 
ness, without  the  aid  of  experience  in  respect  to 
them  is  utterly  puerile  and  absurd. 

The  interpreter  of  those  portions  of  Scripture, 
which  relate  to  experimental  religion,  must  be  ac- 
quainted experimentally  with  his  subject,  in  order  to 
understand  it.  The  necessity  of  piety  in  the  inter- 
preter, in  order  to  his  understanding  aright,  many 
parts,  of  the  Scriptures,  is  asserted  in  John  vii.  17, 
where  Christ,  after  having  declared  that  his  doctrine 


104  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

is  from  God,  proceeds  to  say  that,  If  any  man  will 
do  God's  will,  he  shall  know  of  the  doctrine  wheth- 
er it  be  Divine  or  not.  To  the  same  import  is  John 
viii.  47.  "  He  that  is  of  God,  heareth  God's  words ; 
ye  therefore  hear  them  not,  because  ye  are  not  of 
God."  Also  1  Cor.  ii.  14,  15.  "  The  natural  man 
receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  for 
they  are  foolishness  unto  him  ;  neither  can  he  know 
them,  for  they  are  spiritually  discerned.  But  he  that 
is  spiritual  judgeth  all  things  ;  yet  he  himself  is  judg- 
ed of  no  man.'"  That  is,  his  character  is  fully  under- 
stood by  no  man  who  is  not  pious,  and  consequently 
not  spiritual. 

2.  The  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Intimately  con- 
nected with  observation  and  experience,  is  the  agen- 
cy of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  promoting  the  development 
of  Scripture  doctrine.  Holy  men  of  old  spake,  in 
the  communication  of  Divine  truth,  as  they  were 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  2  Peter  i.  21.  "  All 
Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God  ;"  2  Tim. 
iii.  16 ;  and  is  on  this  account  chiefly  profitable  for 
doctrine.  The  doctrines  of  the  Bible  being  commu- 
nicated under  the  influence  and  direction  of  the  Ho- 
ly Ghost,  it  is  not  strange  that  a  similar  Divine 
agency  should  be  necessary  to  a  right  understanding 
of  many  of  them. 

This  is  undoubtedly  the  fact ;  and  is  in  full  accord- 
ance with  the  dictates  of  enlightened  reason,  as  well 
as  supported  by  the  clearest  Scripture  evidence.  In 
human  productions,  there  must  be  to  some  extent  a 
common  sympathy  between  the  writer  and  reader, 
in  order  that  the  former  may  be  fully  understood  and 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  105 

duly  appreciated.  It  is  therefore  not  strange  or 
anomalous,  that  the  same  is  true  in  respect  to  the 
productions  of  the  inspired  writers. 
;  Christ  promised  the  Holy  Ghost  to  his  disciples, 
to  teach  them  all  things.  John  xiv.  26.  He  de- 
clared that  this  invisible  and  Divine  agent,  should 
"reprove  the  world  of  sin,  of  righteousness,  and  of 
judgment.'" 

Paul  says,  Romans  viii.  14,  "  As  many  as  are  led 
by  the  Spirit  of  God,  they  are  the  sons  of  God.11  Al- 
so 1  Cor.  ii.  12,,  "  We  have  received  the  Spirit  which 
is  of  God,  that  we  might  know  the  things  that  are 
freely  given  to  us  of  God.11  In  the  last  quotation, 
the  reception  of  the  Spirit  by  the  Corinthian  Chris- 
tians, is  represented  expressly  as  being  in  order  to  a 
more  extensive  knowledge  than  they  could  other- 
wise attain.  On  the  same  principle,  John  says  to 
Christians  generally,  1  John  ii.  20,  27,  "  Ye  have  an 
unction  from  the  Holy  One,  and  ye  know  all  things. 
The  same  anointing  teacheth  you  of  all  things,  and 
is  truth.11  Other  Scripture  testimonies,  of  similar 
import,  might  be  adduced,  but  these  are  sufficient, 
and  establish  beyond  reasonable  controversy,  the 
fact  in  question  ;  that  the  special  agency  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  necessary  to  a  competent  knowledge  of 
Scripture  doctrine. 

The  method  by  which  the  agency  of  the  Spirit 
conduces  to  a  right  understanding  of  his  own  writ- 
ten word,  has  been  an  object  of  much  prayerful  in- 
quiry with  the  pious,  and  the  subject  of  some  errone- 
ous impressions  among  the  uninformed.    This  is  not 

effected  by  the  instrumentality  of  dreams  and  vis- 
10* 


106  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OF 

ions,  or  by  direct  supernatural  inspiration,  of  any 
kind.  It  results  from  that  convicting  and  sanctify- 
ing influence,  whereby  the  appropriate  and  specific 
fruits  of  the  Spirit  are  produced  within  us.  These 
fruits  are  enumerated  in  Gal.  v.  22,  23.  "  The  fruit 
of  the  Spirit  is  love,  joy,  peace,  long  suffering,  gen- 
tleness, goodness,  faith,  meekness,  temperance.1' 
The  Spirit  therefore,  does  not  communicate  Divine 
truth  by  a  special  revelation,  but  by  rendering  us 
spiritual ;  by  endowing  us  with  His  graces,  and  pro- 
moting our  experience  of  those  states  of  mind,  to 
which  many  Scriptural  doctrines  relate.  In  this 
method,  He  does  operate  effectually  to  promote  our 
knowledge  of  Scripture  doctrine.  Without  these 
operations  many  degrees  of  doctrinal  knowledge 
would  be  utterly  unattainable,  that  are  now  acquir- 
ed by  the  pious  with  great  facility,  and  to  great  ad- 
vantage. 

The  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  promoting  doc- 
trinal knowledge,  renders  prayer  for  His  illuminating 
influences,  a  peculiarly  important  accompaniment  of 
all  correct  study  of  Scripture  doctrine.  We  can  do 
nothing  to  effect  without  it. 

3.  Abstinence  from  known  sin.  Sin  contributes  to 
blunt  our  moral  and  religious  sensibilities.  It  im- 
pairs our  capacities  of  religious  and  moral  percep- 
tion. 

The  effect  of  sin  in  impairing  our  capacities  for 
the  successful  investigation  of  moral  and  religious 
subjects,  is  strikingly  exemplified  in  the  case  of  the 
drunkard  and  sensualist.  The  vices  of  these  persons 
manifestly  obscure  their  intellectual  and  moral  vis- 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  107 

ion.  Much  that  is  plain  to  others,  is  totally  conceal- 
ed from  them  ;  or  else  is  apprehended  with  the  great- 
est, difficulty,  and  in  a  most  imperfect  manner. 

To  teach  the  ignorant  drunkard  and  sensualist, 
yet  continuing  in  their  vices,  the  pure  morality  of 
the  gospel,  and  give  them  a  minute  and  accurate 
knowledge  of  it,  is  impossible.  We  might  as  easily 
teach  the  blind  to  see,  and  the  deaf  to  hear.  The 
great  degree  of  incapacity  for  the  apprehension  of 
moral  and  religious  truth,  which  characterizes  the 
obdurate  drunkard  and  sensualist,  is  the  natural  re- 
sult of  continuance  in  these  sins.  Individual  acts  of 
immorality,  do  not  always  produce  an  appreciable 
effect  of  this  kind  ;  but  a  continued  repetition  of  such 
acts  is  attended  with  a  hardening  and  deadening  ef- 
fect on  the  mind,  that  is  obvious  to  every  observer. 
In  this  disastrous  effect,  we  recognize  the  result  of 
combined  influence,  the  influence  of  many  individual 
acts  of  sin.  Each  of  these  acts,  we  have  reason  to 
believe,  contributed  its  share,  often  imperceptible,  to 
the  aggregate  of  moral  injury  in  which  all  result ; 
an  aggregate  which  no  reasonable  person  can  con- 
template without  horror. 

Impiety,  even  in  the  absence  of  gross  immoralities, 
as  well  as  in  connexion  with  them,  exerts  a  power- 
ful influence  in  excluding  the  light  of  religious  truth 
from  our  minds.  Selfishness,  pride,  envy,  injustice, 
and  every  other  state  of  mind,  in  which  we  deviate 
from  the  pure  precepts  of  our  holy  religion,  exert 
a  manifest  and  appalling  influence  of  this  kind.  If 
we  indulge  any  of  them,  or  of  their  kindred  deprav- 
ities, we  do  it  at  the  expense  of  being  thus  hardened 


108  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

and  blinded,  in  addition  to  incurring  all  their  other 
attendant  and  consequent  evils. 

The  obstacles  to  the  attainment  of  accurate  doc- 
trinal knowledge,  presented  by  immorality  and  im- 
piety, are  utterly  insuperable.  No  man  can  fully 
overcome  them,  without  ceasing  to  be  either  immor- 
al or  irreligious. 

They  render  even  honest  inquiry  often  fruitless  and 
unavailing;  and  in  respect  to  the  multitude  who  are 
not  disposed  to  be  even  honest  in  their  pursuit  of 
doctrinal  knowledge,  they  are  the  cause  of  numer- 
ous errors,  the  most  absurd  and  pernicious. 

The  immorality  and  impiety  of  the  ungodly,  are 
the  greatest  obstacles  to  be  encountered  in  their  re- 
ligious instruction  by  others.  While  these  principles 
continue  to  maintain  an  ascendancy  in  the  human 
heart,  they  set  argument  and  persuasion  at  defiance. 
Not  till  they  are  expelled,  will  truth  be  able  effectu- 
ally to  enter  and  take  entire  possession  of  the  soul. 
The  expulsion  of  these  will  be  followed  by  the  ad- 
mission of  new  and  unexpected  light  on  religious 
subjects.  Those  therefore,  who  wish  to  be  illumin- 
ated with  the  light  of  religious  doctrine,  must  re- 
nounce those  deeds  of  darkness  and  depravity  which 
impede  such  illumination. 

4.  Doctrinal  passages  of  an  obvious  and  certain 
import.  Some  Scripture  doctrines  are  revealed  with 
the  utmost  clearness  and  precision.  They  are  ob- 
vious to  every  enlightened  and  candid  reader  of  the 
Bible.  All  such  ought  to  be  received  with  the  ut- 
most confidence,  and  other  passages  relating  to  the 
same  subjects,  that  are  ambiguous  or  obscure,  ought 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  109 

to  be  interpreted  in  conformity  with  these  ;  not  in- 
consistently with  them. 

This  rule  is  founded  on  the  obvious  principles  of 
human  language.  We  never  express  ourselves 
clearly  and  strongly,  without  wishing  to  be  under- 
stood according  to  the  proper  and  obvious  meaning 
of  our  words.  Whenever  we  use  expressions  that 
are  ambiguous  or  obscure,  in  connexion  with  those 
that  are  plain  and  obvious ;  we  expect  the  plain  to 
be  interpreted,  and  believed,  and  made  use  of,  if  need 
be,  in  the  exposition  of  what  is  not  plain  ;  never  the 
contrary.  Besides,  whenever  a  subject  has  once 
been  fully  explained,  it  may  be  presumed  to  be  un- 
derstood. Acting  on  this  presumption,  we  do  not 
use  language  in  respect  to  such  a  subject,  with  so 
much  precision  ;  neither  do  we,  in  all  cases,  make 
choice  of  expressions  so  easily  understood,  as  would 
otherwise  be  necessary.  The  obscure  is  to  a  cer- 
tain extent  made  obvious  by  the  plain,  and  as  far  as 
this  is  the  case,  answers  perfectly  all  the  purposes  of 
language. 

The  application  of  this  rule,  in  the  doctrinal  inter- 
pretation of  the  Bible,  is  of  the  highest,  importance. 
The  rule  is  indispensably  necessary.  The  refusal  to 
make  use  of  it,  can  be  the  result  only  of  great  igno- 
rance, or  else  of  great  perverseness.  Manifest  vio- 
lations of  it,  are  not  acts  of  legitimate  interpretation, 
but  injurious  perversions  of  Divine  truth. 

For  example  ;  the  doctrine  of  the  necessity  of 
faith  in  Christ,  exercised  in  this  life,  in  order  to  the 
attainment  of  salvation,  is  clearly  stated,  and  the 
statement  of  it  in  the  most  unequivocal  terms,  often 


110  PARTICULAR   LAWS   OF 

repeated  in  the  New  Testament.  "  He  that  believ- 
eth  and  is  baptized, "  we  are  told,  "  shall  be  saved  ; 
and  he  that  believeth  not,  shall  be  damned.'1  Other 
passages  of  like,  and  like  obvious  import,  are  numer- 
ous in  the  New  Testament.  This  salvation  by  faith 
is  required  to  be  published  to  every  creature,  and 
all,  every  where,  are  commanded  lo  repent  and  em- 
brace the  gospel. 

In  other  places  we  are  told,  that  Christ  tasted 
death  for  every  man,  that  God  is  the  Savior  of  all 
men,  especially  of  those  that  believe,  1  Tim.  iv.  10.  &c. 
These  latter  passages  are  manifestly  ambiguous  pr 
indefinite.  They  assert  the  general  fact,  that  Christ 
died  for  all  men.  But  in  what  sense  he  died  for  them 
all,  they  do  not  specify.  Considered  irrespective  of 
other  passages  of  Scripture  relating  to  this  subject, 
it  would  be  impossible  to  determine  with  certainty, 
whether  he  died  to  save  all  men  unconditionally  and 
absolutely,  or  to  place  them  in  circumstances  in 
which  they  can  all  obtain  salvation  by  complying 
with  specific  and  reasonable  conditions. 

The  Scripture  doctrine  of  the  necessity  of  faith  to 
the  attainment  of  salvation,  shows  indubitably,  that 
the  former  is  not  intended  in  this  case,  but  obviously 
the  latter. 

5.  Ecclesiastical  history.  History  is  one  of  the 
most  extensive  and  valuable  fields  of  human  know- 
ledge. The  historical  portions  of  the  Bible,  reflect 
much  light  on  its  doctrinal  ones.  The  doctrinal  his- 
tory of  the  church,  since  the  canon  of  Scripture  was 
completed,  forms  one  of  the  most  interesting  depart- 
ments of  religious  investigation  and  inquiry.     It  de- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION,  111 

"  '  "fl 

f* 

serves  to  be  studied  by  every  one  who  has  the  means 
of  prosecuting  this  study.  These  means  are  abun- 
dant, and  cheap  enough  to  be  placed,  to  some  extent, 
within  the  reach  of  all  intelligent  readers  of  the  En- 
glish language.  Perfect  ignorance  in  respect  to  this 
subject,  is  probably  not  uncommon  with  intelligent 
persons,  but  it  is  unnecessary. 

In  all  the  more  important  controversies  respecting 
doctrinal  interpretation,  a  recurrence  to  ecclesiastic- 
al history,  is  of  use.  It  is  not  often  necessary  to  es- 
tablish any  of  the  fundamental  articles  of  the  Chris- 
tian faith.  They  may  all  be  ascertained  and  estab- 
lished by  more  direct  means.  But  it  is  useful  for 
the  confirmation  even  of  these;  and  for  the  more 
perfect  elucidation  of  some  doctrinal  subjects  of 
much  interest,  that  would  be  otherwise  obscure. 

Many  subjects  that  are  imperfectly  explained  in 
the  Bible,  were  doubtless  more  fully  expounded  in 
the  oral  instructions  of  the  apostles  and  of  other  in- 
spired teachers.  Some  Scriptural  modes  of  express- 
ion that  are  obscure  or  ambiguous  now,  were  for- 
merly free  from  either  obscurity  or  ambiguity.  In 
regard  to  all  such  subjects  and  modes  of  expression, 
the  evidence  of  ecclesiastical  history,  when  clear  and 
explicit,  is  of  great  importance. 

We  know  that  the  primitive  Christian  churches 
were  instructed  in  the  true  doctrines  of  the  Christian 
religion,  and  that  they  received  those  doctrines  as 
articles  of  a  common  faith.  We  cannot  reasonably 
suppose  that  any  considerable  portion  of  those 
churches  planted  by  the  apostles,  became  essential- 
ly corrupt,  in  respect  to  Christian  doctrine,  immedi- 


112  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OF 

ately  after  the  voice  of  inspiration  had  ceased.  The 
truth  which  had  been  taught  with  such  demonstra- 
tion of  the  Spirit,  and  with  power,  could  not  be  lost 
at  once,  by  the  great  body  of  the  Christian  world. 
Errors  might  be  expected  gradually  to  creep  in,  and 
impair  the  symmetry,  and  deface  the  beauty  of  the 
Christian  system  ;  but  the  substantial  elements  and 
leading  outlines  of  Divine  truth,  would  long  retain 
their  hold,  and  maintain  their  high  standing  in  the 
favor  of  the  people  of  God. 

From  a  knowledge  of  the  sentiments  and  usages 
of  the  early  Christian  churches,  we  may  derive 
valuable  assistance,  in  determining  some  of  the  sen- 
timents and  usages  of  the  apostles,  which  are  not 
definitely  and  expressly  asserted  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

Facts  however  ascertained,  are  a  safe  rule  of  in- 
terpretation, in  respect  to  language  which  relates  to 
them.  They  are  not  to  be  denied,  or  softened  down, 
and  explained  away,  for  the  purpose  of  making  them 
consistent  with  language  ;  but  language  is  to  be  so 
interpreted  as  to  make  it  correspond  to  facts,  and 
consistent  with  them.  When  correctly  used,  it  is 
capable  of  such  interpretation.  Agreeably  to  this 
principle,  historical  facts  indicate  unequivocally,  the 
right  method  of  interpreting  some  parts  of  the  Bible, 
which  might,  in  the  neglect  of  these,  be  peculiarly 
liable  to  be  either  unnoticed  or  misapprehended. 
The  historical  facts  relative  to  the  observance  of  the 
Christian  Sabbath,  in  the  ages  immediately  subse- 
quent to  that  of  the  apostles,  are  of  this  description. 
Independently  of  the  Bible,  we  learn  from  authentic 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  113 

history,  that  the  first  clay  of  the  week  was  observed 
by  the  primitive  Christians,  as  a  Sabbath,  a  day  of 
religious  worship. 

The  churches  planted  in  different  countries  and  by 
different  apostles,  concurred  in  this  observance.  It 
is  utterly  improbable,  that  they  would  have  done  so, 
had  not  the  institution  in  question  been  one  of  the 
primary  institutions  of  the  Christian  church,  and  a 
matter  of  express  apostolic  precept.  From  the  fact, 
therefore,  of  the  general  observance  of  the  Christian 
Sabbath,  in  the  early  ages  of  the  church,  we  infer 
with  confidence,  that  it  must  have  been  enjoined  by 
the  apostles.  This  fact  being  ascertained,  contrib- 
utes to  illustrate  some  passages  of  Scripture,  that 
would  otherwise  be  liable  to  misapprehension,  or 
the  full  meaning  of  which,  would  be  liable  to  be 
overlooked.  The  first  day  of  the  week  is  mention- 
ed in  the  New  Testament,  as  a  day  of  religious  wor- 
ship ;  Acts  ii.  1.  xx.  7;  John  xx.  19,  26;  1  Cor. 
xvi.  1,2;  Rev.  i.  10.  Benevolent  contributions  were 
extensively  enjoined  by  Paul,  to  be  taken  up,  or  set 
apart  on  that  day.  It  is  called  the  Lord's  day,  in 
distinction  from  all  others.  But  in  the  interpretation 
of  Rev.  i.  10,  where  the  term  Lord's  day  occurs,  the 
question  immediately  arises,  in  what  sense  can  the 
first  day  of  the  week,  or  any  day,  be  peculiarly  the 
Lord's  day  ;  for  in  a  general  sense,  all  days  are  his. 
It  can  be  the  Lord's  day  in  no  other  sense,  as  far  as 
we  can  see,  than  as  a  day  of  religious  worship,  a 
sabbath.  We  might  arrive  safely  and  confidently  at 
a  right  conclusion,  in  respect  to  the  Christian  sab- 
bath, without  any  aid  from  ecclesiastical  history.  But 
11 


114  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

by  this  additional  light,  we  are  happily  confirmed 
and  strengthened  in  our  belief,  that  this  is  an  institu- 
tion of  apostolic  origin,  and  of  Divine  authority. 
Multitudes  whose  study  of  the  Scriptures  has  not 
been  sufficiently  thorough  to  give  them  the  full  force 
of  the  Scriptural  argument,  standing  alone,  are  put 
in  full  and  easy  possession  of  the  truth,  by  means  of 
the  historical  light  thrown  on  this  subject  from  other 
sources. 

The  propriety  of  resorting  to  ecclesiastical  histo- 
ry, for  a  discovery  and  confirmation  of  the  doctrinal 
system  of  the  New  Testament,  is  obvious  to  all  en- 
lightened minds.  This  course  is  generally  pursued 
in  the  interpretation  of  human  productions,  which 
have  come  down  to  us  from  antiquity  ;  and  it  is  ca- 
pable of  being  pursued  both  in  respect  to  them,  and 
in  respect  to  the  Bible,  with  the  happiest  results. 

By  resorting  to  ecclesiastical  history  for  informa- 
tion in  respect  to  Christian  doctrine,  we  do  not  as- 
sume that  the  Bible  is  unnecessarily  obscure,  or  de- 
fective in  the  extent  of  its  information.  We  claim 
for  it  the  greatest  possible  perfection  in  every  re- 
spect. But  perfect  and  complete  as  its  disclosures 
are,  they  are  subject  to  the  laws  of  language  ;  and 
are  liable  through  ignorance,  inattention,  and  preju- 
dice, to  be  misunderstood  and  perverted.  It  does 
undoubtedly  sometimes  happen,  that  the  light  of  his- 
tory if  clearly  perceived,  is  calculated  to  save  us 
fom  doctrinal  errors,  when  we  should  otherwise  fall 
into  them.  If  this  source  of  information  on  doctrin- 
al subjects  was  more  thoroughly  and  generally  inves- 
tigated, its  salutary  contributions  in  the  promotion 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  115 

of  the  cause  of  truth,  would  doubtless  be  greatly  in- 
creased. 

To  assume,  as  some  have  inconsiderately  done, 
that  a  knowledge  of  ecclesiastical  history  can  be  of 
use  in  facilitating  the  successful  study  of  Biblical  doc- 
trine, is  to  contradict  reason  and  experience.  All 
the  sources  of  information,  on  religious  subjects,  are 
useful.  By  the  diligent  improvement  of  all,  the 
greatest  amount  of  knowledge  may  be  attained. 
Our  methods  of  study  are  often  defective.  We  may 
approach  the  truth  by  one  means  of  information, 
without  success,  when  by  taking  advantage  of  an- 
other, we  should  be  sure  of  being  rewarded  for  our 
pains,  with  substantial  additions  to  our  knowledge. 

Articles  of  faith  may  be  capable  of  being  fully  es- 
tablished by  Scriptural  evidence  alone,  and  yet  not 
be  so  established  to  our  minds.  Cases  of  this  kind 
are  numerous  and  important ;  and  where  they  re- 
late to  subjects  on  which  the  light  of  ecclesiastical 
history  is  shed,  they  ought  to  be  studied  in  that 
light. 

AH  truth  is  consistent  with  itself.  No  fact,  or  se- 
ries of  facts  in  history,  when  rightly  and  fully  under- 
stood, can  be  incompatible  with  any  doctrinal  truth. 
Even  where  history  can  afford  us  no  assistance  in 
decyphering  the  doctrines  Scripture,  it  can,  if  prop 
erly  used,  do  us  no  injury.  As  far  as  it  speaks  at 
all,  its  voice  is  in  harmony  with  that  of  the  Spirit. 

In  bringing  ecclesiastical  history  to  our  aid,  in 
Biblical  Interpretation,  we  ought  to  satisfy  ourselves 
on  valid  grounds,  that  the  facts  which  we  assume  as 
historical,  are  real.     The  facts  which  we  make  use 


116  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OF 

of  as  aids  in  doctrinal  interpretation,  ought  to  be 
well  authenticated  and  supported.  Any  others  will 
certainly  be  delusive. 

Tradition  is  too  uncertain  to  be  worthy  of  the 
least  confidence  as  a  rule  of  judgment,  in  relation  to 
this  matter.  It  has  never  proved  a  safe  depository 
for  truth,  or  a  safe  channel  for  its  continued  trans- 
mission during  any  long  period  of  time. 

The  degree  of  influence  which  particular  historic- 
al facts  ought  to  have,  in  determining  our  doctrinal 
opinions,  depends  entirely  on  the  relation  of  those 
facts  to  the  opinions  in  question  ;  and  upon  the  rela- 
tion of  those  opinions  to  known  Scriptural  evidence 
on  the  same  subjects. 

The  more  direct  and  immediate  the  relation  of  a 
particular  fact  is,  to  a  doctrinal  opinion,  the  greater 
influence  it  ought  to  exert  in  favor  of  that  opinion. 
The  more  direct  and  immediate  the  relation  of  a  doc- 
trinal opinion  is,  to  known  Scriptural  evidence, 
the  less  amount  of  external  evidence,  of  any  kind, 
will  be  requisite,  to  establish  it.  In  proportion  as 
there  is  more  evidence  from  either  one  of  these 
sources,  less  will  be  requisite  from  the  other,  to  es- 
tablish a  point  in  question. 

6.  Systematic  theology.  The  statement  of  the  dif- 
ferent religious  doctrines  of  the  Bible,  in  their  natur- 
al order  and  connexions,  constitutes  a  system  of  re- 
ligious doctrine,  or  of  Biblical  theology.  The  study 
of  these  doctrines  in  their  mutual  relations  to  each 
other,  is  essential  to  the  attainment  of  any  profound 
and  extensive  knowledge  of  them.  The  careful  study 
of  well  written  systems  of  Divinity,  contributes  es- 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  117 

sentially  to  promote  the  correct  doctrinal  interpre- 
tation of  the  Bible.  The  systematic  statement  of 
religious  doctrines,  facilitates  our  perfect  apprehen- 
sion of  them,  as  exhibited  in  the  Scriptures. 

Few  have  ever  become  eminent  for  their  attain- 
ments in  this  department  of  religious  knowledge, 
who  have  not  availed  themselves  of  the  works  of 
writers  on  systematic  theology.  These  works  ought 
not  to  be  studied  as  depositories  of  certain  truth,  or 
ultimate  sources  of  information  on  religious  doctrine, 
but  solely  as  helps  to  a  more  perfect  understanding 
of  the  doctrinal  passages  of  the  Bible. 

Sec.  2.     General  principles  relating  to  the 
material  types  and  symbols  of  the  bible. 

1.  Ordinary  discourse  consists  of  words  which  are 
used  directly  as  the  signs  of  things.  In  allegorical 
discourses,  words  are  used  to  represent  supposed  ob- 
jects and  events,  which  are  themselves  the  signs  of 
analogous  ones.  There  is  yet  another  kind  of  dis- 
course, and  another  modification  of  language,  in 
which  words  are  used  as  the  signs  of  real  or  suppo- 
sed objects  and  events,  which  objects  and  events  are 
themselves  the  signs  of  similar  or  analogous  ones. 
These  symbolical  objects  and  events  are  frequently 
to  be  met  with  in  the  Bible.  The  right  interpreta- 
tion of  them,  is  often  a  matter  of  no  small  difficulty, 
and  of  no  inconsiderable  importance. 

All  language  is  symbolical ;  but  the  words  type 

and  symbol  are  generally  used  in  a  particular  and 

restricted  sense,  to  denote  objects  and  transactions, 

which  are  themselves  the  designed  representations 

11* 


118  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OF 

of  other  and  different  objects,  and  of  higher  and  dif- 
ferent transactions. 

In  this  sense  the  sacrifices  of  the  former  dispen- 
sation were  types  of  Christ;  and  circumcision  a 
symbol  of  regeneration.  ]n  the  same  sense,  bap- 
tism and  the  Lord's  supper  are  symbolical  institu- 
tions. The  lamb,  or  other  animal  offered  in  sacri- 
fice, represented  Christ  suffering  for  sin.  The  bread 
and  wine  of  the  Lord's  supper,  represent  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ,  taxed  with  suffering  on  our 
account,  and  becoming  efficacious  in  the  procure- 
ment of  pardon  and  eternal  life. 

All  Scriptural  types  and  symbols  have  some  mean- 
ing, either  as  material  representations  of  co-existing 
objects,  or  else  of  past  or  future  objects  or  events. 
Used  to  denote  such  representations,  these  words 
are  nearly  synonymous,  and  are  applied  indiscrimin- 
ately to  many  of  the  same  things.  The  word  type, 
however,  is  most  generally  applied  to  denote  a  ma- 
terial representation  of  something  to  come,  and  sym- 
bol of  something  past.  According  to  this  usage, 
sacrifices  are  denominated  types,  and  the  bread  and 
wine  of  the  Lord's  supper,  symbols.  The  lamb  of- 
fered in  sacrifice,  was  a  type  of  Christ,  and  the  bread 
and  wine  of  the  Lord's  supper,  are  symbolical  repre- 
sentations of  him. 

2.  The  Scriptural  types  and  symbols  are  either  sim- 
ple or  complex.  A  material  representation  of  any 
single  object,  is  a  simple  type  or  symbol.  Where 
more  than  a  single  object  is  represented,  the  type  or 
symbol  of  such  representation  is  complex.  The  el- 
ements of  all  the  Scrpture  types  and  symbols,  are 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  119 

simple.  In  their  combinations  they  are  usually  ex- 
hibited as  complex,  and  require  a  careful  analysis  in 
order  to  their  right  explanation. 

These  modes  of  communication  may  further  be 
considered  as  historical,  prophetical,  or  moral.  Each 
simple  element  is  of  one  or  the  other  of  these  char- 
acters. In  their  complex  state,  two  or  more  of  these 
characteristics  are  generally  united.  The  same 
complex  type  is  partly  historical  and  partly  of  a  mor- 
al nature;  or  partly  prophetical  and  moral,  &c.  or 
else,  as  is  sometimes  the  fact,  it  may  combine  the  his- 
torical, prophetical,  and  moral,  in  one  complex,  em- 
blematical representation.  For  example  ;  contem- 
plate an  analysis  of  the  Sabbath. 

(1)  The  Sabbath,  considered  in  respect  to  its  week- 
ly recurrence,  and  holy  rest,  is  a  symbol  of  a  past 
event,  the  completion  of  the  work  of  creation  ; 

(2.)  Considered  in  respect  to  its  observance  on  the 
first  day  of  the  week,  it  is  commemorative  of  another 
past  event,  the  resurrection  of  Christ ; 

(3.)  Considered  in  respect  to  its  holy  and  religious 
services  and  pleasures,  it  is  a  type  of  a  future  sab- 
batism,  the  employments  and  pleasures  of  heaven. 

.  Circumcision.  (1.)  Circumcision,  considered  as 
the  appointed  seal  of  God's  covenant  with  his  peo- 
ple, was  a  token,  a  remembrancer,  of  that  covenant ; 
a  means  of  keeping  it  in  mind,  and  of  preserving  a 
knowledge  of  it. 

(2.)  In  another  respect  it  was  the  emblem  of  mor- 
al purification,  and  represented  the  work  of  the  Ho- 
ly Spirit,  in  regeneration  and  sanctification. 

(3.)  As  an  act  of  subjection  and  a  sign  of  allegi- 


120  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

ance  to  God,  and  of  professed  submission  to  his  au- 
thority, it  was  expressive  of  an  obligation  to  keep 
the  whole  law.     See  Gal.  v.  3. 

Many  of  the  institutions  of  religion,  under  the  for- 
mer dispensation,  were  of  a  symbolical  character. 
This  was  the  case  with  the  Sabbath,  sacrifices,  and 
circumcision.  The  Sabbath,  the  Lord's  supper,  and 
baptism,  are  symbolical  now. 

The  symbolical  objects  which  occur  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, aside  from  the  institutions  of  religion,  are  nu- 
merous ;  of  which  the  following  may  serve  as  speci- 
mens :  The  mystical  river  of  Ezekiel,  xlvii. ;  the 
great  image  decribed  in  Dan.  ii.  ;  the  stone  cut  out 
of  the  mountain  without  hands,  which  grew,  and  be- 
came itself  a  mountain,  Dan.  ii.  ;  the  tree  described 
in  Dan.  iv. ;  the  four  beasts  described  in  Dan.  vii. 

Many  other  prophetic  symbols  might  be  added  to 
this  list ;  but  these  are  probably  sufficient  to  answer 
the  purpose  of  illustration. 

3.  The  Scriptural  types  and  symbols  are  found- 
ed on  the  same  principle  as  metaphors  and  allegories, 
that  of  resemblance  or  analogy  ;  but  they  do  not  at- 
tain their  end  by  the  same  means.  Metaphors  and 
allegories  are  figures  of  words  and  paragraphs  ; 
symbols  and  types  are  figures  of  things,  which  words 
literally  designate.  The  symbolical  language  of  the 
Scriptures,  corresponds  to  the  hieroglyphics  or  sym- 
bolical and  emblematical  language  of  the  ancients; 
in  which  a  representation  of  one  object,  was  used 
extensively  to  denote  a  similar  or  analogous  one,  of 
a  higher  order.  Thus,  an  eye  was  the  hieroglyphic- 
al  symbol  of  knowledge  ;  a  circle,  of  eternity  ;  a  vi- 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  121 

per,  of  ingratitude ;  an  ant  of  wisdom  ;  the  sun,  of 
God. 

There  must  be  some  resemblance  or  analogy  be- 
tween objects,  or  in  order  to  lay  a  foundation  for  the 
symbolical  use  of  them.  This  analogy  does  not, 
however,  constitute  them  symbols.  They  are  made 
symbols,  as  different  combinations  of  letters  are 
made  words,  and  as  words  are  made  metaphors ;  by 
receiving  an  express  designation  to  that  office,  and 
by  being  actually  used  in  a  symbolical  sense. 

4.  In  the  Bible  all  those  objects  ought  to  be  con- 
sidered symbols,  which  God  has  made  use  of,  as  such, 
and  no  others.  In  the  investigation  of  the  Scripture 
symbols,  therefore,  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  multiply 
these  modes  of  instruction,  according  to  any  fancied 
or  real  adaptation  of  one  object  to  represent  another, 
but  simply  according  to  Divine  appointment,  and 
known  Scripture  usage. 

We  ought  not  to  consider  the  metaphorical  lan- 
guage of  the  Bible  as  indicating  that  the  objects  from 
which  it  is  taken,  possess  a  symbolical  character. 
Some  of  the  Scriptural  metaphors  are  taken  from 
symbolical  objects  and  transactions  ;  but  in  regard 
to  the  great  majority  of  them,  this  is  not  the  fact. 
The  objects  from  which  most  of  the  metaphorical 
language  of  the  Scriptures  is  derived,  have  no  fixed 
Scriptural  meaning,  as  Divinely  appointed  symbols  ; 
and  cannot,  with  propriety,  have  such  meanings  as- 
signed them  by  the  inlerpreter. 

In  the  relation  and  use  of  tropical  expressions,  the 
inspired  writers  seem  to  have  taken  the  same  liber- 
ties, and  acted  on  the  same  principles  as  other  men. 


122  PARTICULAR   LAWS   OP 

They  describe  the  futue  by  figurative  representations 
drawn  from  the  present  and  past,  as  they  were  to 
some  extent  compelled  to  do,  if  they  described  it  at 
all.  Invisible  realities,  they  often  set  forth  by  meta- 
phors, drawn  from  visible  objects.  But  in  either  case, 
their  language  does  not  imply  the  existence  of  any 
other  relation  between  the  objects  compared,  than 
that  of  general  analogy  or  resemblance  ;  a  relation 
which  is  at  the  foundation  of  all  metaphorical  or  al- 
legorical representations  whatever. 

A  disposition  to  magnify  every  Scriptural  object 
into  a  type  or  symbol ;  like  that  to  exalt  every  word 
into  a  metaphor,  has  no  adequate  foundation,  either 
in  Scripture  or  reason.  Under  pretext  of  making 
the  Scriptures  more  significant  and  instructive,  it  of- 
ten diverts  us  from  their  plain  and  obvious  meaning 
into  an  idle  search  after  some  higher  symbolical 
sense,  which  they  were  never  designed  to  convey. 

The  field  of  Scriptural  symbolical  imagery  is  ex- 
tensive ;  but  still  it  has  its  limits.  Those  limits  are 
capable  of  being  determined  with  considerable  accu- 
racy. Every  Biblical  interpreter  ought,  as  far  as  he 
can,  to  determine  and  observe  them. 

5.  The  symbolical  use  of  objects,  is  as  much  an  ar- 
bitrary procedure,  to  be  decided  on  according  to  evi- 
dence, as  that  of  words.  In  the  absence  of  evidence 
that  a  word  is  used  in  a  particular  way,  we  have  no 
reason  to  conclude  that  it  is  so  used.  The  same  is 
true  in  respect  to  objects  and  transactions.  This  ev- 
idence may  be  somewhat  diverse  in  kind,  but  it  must 
be  evidence.     Nothing  less  will  answer  the  condi- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  123 

tions  of  the  case.  To  interpret  objects  as  symbols, 
on  mere  conjecture,  is  utterly  erroneous. 

Nothing  short  of  testimony  to  the  fact,  or  decisive 
circumstantial  evidence  of  it,  can  be  a  valid  ground 
for  considering  any  Scriptural  object  or  transaction, 
symbolical.  The  propriety  of  this  rule  arises  from 
the  very  nature  of  the  case.  A  material  symbol  im- 
plies the  arbitrary  designation  of  one  object  to  repre- 
sent another.  The  connexion  between  a  type  and 
antitype,  is  therefore  arbitrary,  and  must  be  explain- 
ed in  order  to  be  understood.  It  cannot  be  deter- 
mined except  by  an  explanation  of  some  kind.  This 
may  be  direct  or  indirect,  but  it  must  comprise  an 
unequivocal  indication  of  the  fact  in  question,  before 
that  fact  can  be  admitted. 

To  proceed  a  step  in  the  recognition  of  types  and 
symbols,  without  being  guided  by  evidence,  is  to  be- 
come the  inventors  of  symbolical  and  typical  signifi- 
cations, rather  than  the  interpreters  of  them,  as  in- 
vented and  used  by  others. 

The  Scriptural  symbols  are  a  part  of  the  Divine 
communications,  and  as  such,  must  have  been  de- 
signed to  express  a  particular  sense.  But  how  can 
we  determine  the  sense  of  a  symbolical  communica- 
tion, any  further  than  we  have  decisive  evidence 
that  the  objects  composing  it  are  symbolical?  All 
the  Scriptural  symbols  are  accompanied  with  mani- 
fest and  unequivocal  indications  of  their  symbolical 
character,  or  not.  If  they  are,  these  indications  can 
be  ascertained  and  appreciated.  If  not,  God  has  so 
far  departed  from  the  established  and  otherwise  uni- 
versal principles  of  language,  in  this  part  of  his  word, 


124  PARTICULAR    LAWS  OF 

as  to  render  some  portions  of  it  incapable  of  being" 
certainly  and  fully  understood,  without  further  reve- 
lation, definitive  of  its  hidden  sense ;  a  supposition 
unsustained  by  any  substantial  evidence,  and  incon- 
sistent with  the  doctrine  of  the  perfection  of  the  Ho- 
ly Scriptures,  as  a  rule  of  faith  and  practice. 

Sec.  3.    Rules  for  determining   the   signifi- 
cation  OF  MATERIAL   TYPES   AND  SYMBOLS. 

A  knowledge  of  the  nature  of  material  types  and 
symbols  is  necessary  as  a  prerequisite  to  understand- 
ing them.  The  interpretation  of  this  part  of  the  Di- 
vine communications,  is  attended  with  some  difficul- 
ty, and  requires  particular  attention,  and  persevering 
study  ;  but  it  may,  to  a  considerable  extent,  be  ac- 
complished by  every  sensible  person.  No  man  uses 
any  symbol  of  thought,  as  a  medium  for  the  commu- 
nication of  what  he  deems  important  truth,  without 
either  supposing  that  it  is  already  understood,  or  ca- 
pable of  being  determined,  or  else  explaining  it. 

In  the  use  of  any  medium  of  communication,  we 
are  justly  required  to  explain  what  is  not  indicated 
with  sufficient  clearness,  in  some  other  way.  On 
this  principle,  the  presumption  is  irresistible,  that  ev- 
ery portion  of  the  Divine  communications  is  intelli- 
gible by  some  means ;  that  indications  of  the  sense 
of  all  the  symbols  of  the  Bible,  both  material  and 
verbal,  may  be  found  somewhere,  and  to  a  great  ex- 
tent, in  the  Bible  itself. 

All  the  symbols  of  the  Bible  are  not  equally  defin- 
ite and  precise  in  their  signification,  but  they  all  ex- 
press an  appropriate  sense,  which  is  capable  of  being 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  125 

determined  by  a  reference  to  the  legitimate  sources 
of  information. 

1.  The  nature  of  the  symbolical  object.  Objects 
are  used  as  the  symbols  of  other  objects  in  conse- 
quence of  some  resemblance  or  analogy  which  they 
bear  to  one  another.  A  knowledge  of  these  similar 
or  analogous  properties  in  the  symbolical  object,  is 
as  necessary  to  an  understanding  of  the  thing  signi- 
fied, as  that  of  the  corresponding  properties  in  a 
metaphor,  is  to  an  understanding  of  its  metaphorical 
sense.  The  first  thing  to  be  done  therefore,  in  the 
interpretation  of  material  symbols,  is  to  ascertain  and 
consider  the  nature  of  the  symbolical  object  or  trans- 
action. In  ignorance  of  this,  a  true  apprehension  of 
the  things  signified,  is  impossible. 

For  example  ;  in  determining  the  proper  signifi- 
cancy  of  the  sacrifices,  we  ought  to  ascertain  what 
the  sacrificial  victims  and  services  were.  An  under- 
standing of  these  is  attainable  by  a  resort  to  the  ap- 
propriate sources  of  information  respecting  them. 
The  sacrificial  victims  and  services,  properly  under- 
stood, are  the  indications  of  that  high  symbolical 
sense,  with  which  they  are  invested  by  God. 

The  same  is  true  of  all  the  material  symbols.  They 
may  consist  of  objects  that  are  animate  or  inanim- 
ate, simple  or  complex.  Whatever  those  objects  are, 
they  ought  to  be  carefully  considered,  and  their  true 
nature  accurately  determined.  A  neglect  to  do  this, 
has  been  the  occasion  of  serious  and  palpable  errors 
in  symbolical  interpretation.  A  due  knowledge  and 
consideration  of  symbolical  imagery,  is  particularly 
12 


126  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OF 

important   in  the  interpretation    of  those  symbols 
which  belong  to  prophetic  vision. 

2.  Each  essential  element  of  complex  and  heteroge- 
neous symbols.  When  symbols  are  of  a  complex 
and  heterogeneous  character,  each  of  the  complex 
and  heterogeneous  elements  ought  to  be  taken  into 
the  account,  in  determining  their  signification.  The 
lion  with  eagle's  wings  ;  the  leopard  with  four  wings 
of  a  fowl,  and  four  heads  ;  Dan.  vii.  4,  6.  The  drag- 
on with  seven  heads  and  ten  horns  ;  Rev,  xii.  3,  and 
the  nameless  beast,  with  the  same  complement  both 
of  heads  and  horns  ;  Rev.  xiii.  1,  2,  are  instances  of 
heterogeneous  symbolical  imagery.  The  omission 
of  any  single  element  of  a  heterogeneous  symbol, 
may  essentially  vitiate  our  estimate  of  its  meaning, 
and  all  our  reasonings  respecting  it. 

3.  The  leading  features  of  a  symbol.  No  one  ob- 
ject can  be  made  a  true  representative  of  another, 
in  all  respects.  The  resemblance  or  analogy  of  one 
object  or  transaction  to  another,  is  in  all  cases  par- 
tial, extending  only  to  such  properties  and  relations 
as  they  possess  in  common. 

In  order  that  one  object  may  serve  as  a  fit  type  or 
symbol  of  another,  it  must  possess  some  prominent 
and  obvious  points  of  resemblance  or  analogy  to  it. 
If  the  points  of  resemblance  are  not  in  any  degree 
prominent  and  obvious,  the  symbol  will  be  propor- 
tionably  inexpressive  and  obscure.  In  proportion 
as  they  are  prominent  and  obvious,  will  the  symbol 
be  both  expressive  and  intelligible.  In  the  study  of 
symbols  therefore,  it  is  necessary  to  investigate  ac- 
curately, the  points  of  resemblance  between  the  sym- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  127 

bolical  object  or  transaction,  and  the  thing  signified 
by  it.  These  will  generally  be  the  leading  and 
prominent  features  and  characteristics  of  the  sym- 
bolical object. 

4.  Accompanying  explanations.  A  knowledge  and 
consideration  of  a  symbolical  object  ;  and  an  inves- 
tigation of  its  leading  features,  do  not  necessarily 
suggest  its  true  and  full  import.  For  example ;  we 
may  be  sufficiently  acquainted  with  the  character 
and  habits  of  the  horse,  or  lion,  or  leopard,  or  drag- 
on, and  not  understand  at  all,  what  these  animals  are 
used  to  represent  in  prophetic  vision.  In  order  to 
make  these  modes  of  communication  significant, 
there  is  often  some  accompanying  indication  of  their 
true  import.  In  some  cases  the  accompanying  ex- 
planations are  as  full  and  complete  as  words  can  ex- 
press. In  some  cases  they  are  less  explicit,  with- 
out being  essentially  less  satisfactory  or  necessary. 

Wherever  accompanying  explanations  occur,  they 
ought  to  receive  the  most  minute  and  careful  atten- 
tion. Their  aid  is  of  indispensable  necessity  to  the 
right  interpretation  of  symbols.  The  symbolical  in- 
stitutions of  the  Bible  are  accompanied  with  import- 
ant explanations  of  this  kind.  The  same  is  true  in 
respect  to  most  of  the  prophetic  symbols,  especially 
those  which  belong  to  the  books  of  Daniel,  Zechari- 
ah,  and  that  of  Revelation. 

5.  Collateral  information.  When  there  is  no  ac- 
companying explanation  of  a  Scriptural  type  or  sym- 
bol, or  one  that  is  indefinite  and  indecisive,  our  next 
resort  is  to  collateral  information  contained  in  other 
oarts  of  the  Bible.     This  may  be  either  direct  or  in- 


128  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

direct.  It  is  direct  when  it  consists  of  a  formal  ex- 
planation of  the  symbol.  Of  this  character  is  the 
explanation  of  circumcision,  contained  in  Rom.  iv. 
11,  where  that  rite  is  declared  to  have  been  a  sign 
and  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith ;  or  in  other 
words,  of  justification  by  faith ;  also  in  Rom.  ii.  !28, 
29,  where  the  same  is  declared  not  to  be  merely  out- 
ward in  the  flesh,  but  inward,  denoting  a  work  of 
grace  on  the  heart  and  spirit,  the  praise  of  which  is 
not  of  men  but  of  God. 

Of  the  same  direct  specific  character,  are  the  ex- 
planations of  the  ancient  sacrifices,  contained  in  Heb. 
x.  where  they  are  represented  as  having  been  a 
shadow  of  good  things  then  future,  and  as  adumbra- 
ting the  greater  and  more  excellent  sacrifice  of  Christ, 
by  which  he  hath  perfected  for  ever,  all  them  that 
believe. 

The  collateral  information  of  the  Scriptures,  on 
this  subject,  is  indirect  when  it  does  not  comprehend 
a  formal  explanation  of  the  symbol,  but  the  state- 
ment of  a  fact  or  principle,  from  which  such  inform- 
ation may  be  inferred.  Such  statements  sometimes 
occur  in  the  context  to  which  the  symbols  they  illus- 
trate belong,  and  sometimes  in  remote  portions  of 
the  sacred  volume.  Of  this  character  is  the  decla- 
ration of  God,  addressed  to  the  serpent,  Gen.  iii.  15. 
"I  will  put  enmity  between  thee  and  the  woman, 
and  between  thy  seed  and  her  seed.  It  shall  bruise 
thy  head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel.1'  This  pas- 
sage evidently  refers  to  the  Savior  of  the  human  race, 
who  was  to  be  a  descendant  of  the  woman,  and  by 
whom  Satan  was  to  be  vanquished,  and  his  captives 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  129 

delivered.  The  bruising  of  his  heel,  indicates  the 
temporary  sufferings  he  should  endure  in  achieving 
the  conquest  referred  to,  and  in  procuring  the  re- 
demption of  sinners.  This  anticipated  conquest,  as 
far  as  appears  from  the  Bible,  was  the  only  ground 
of  hope  to  ancient  believers.  It  raised  their  expec- 
tation of  the  destruction  of  their  destroyer,  and  of 
their  happy  deliverance  from  the  dominion  of  Satan, 
and  the  curse  brought  upon  them  by  sin.  Thus  in- 
terpreted, the  passage  in  question  contains  a  distinct 
intimation  of  the  advent  and  work  of  the  Redeemer, 
as  our  atoning  priest.  If  the  sacrifices  had  not  been 
otherwise  explained,  this  would  probably  have  been 
sufficient  to  indicate  their  true  symbolical  import. 

Those  who  read  and  pondered  this  mysterious  an- 
nunciation, must  have  regarded  the  sacrifices  which 
were  offered  for  sin,  as  emblematic  representations, 
and  types  of  that  mighty  Deliverer,  by  whom  the 
head  of  the  serpent  was  to  be  crushed  at  the  expense 
of  his  own  temporary  and  personal  sufferings.  Since 
it  was  impossible  that  their  offerings  should  have 
been  supposed  by  the  pious,  to  possess  any  direct 
efficacy  in  procuring  the  remission  of  sins,  they  must 
have  been  understood  from  the  beginning,  to  be  typ- 
ical of  the  expiatory  sufferings  and  death  of  the  Re- 
deemer. In  this  sense  they  were  subsequently  ex- 
plained by  the  apostle  Paul,  not  as  mysteries  which 
till  then  had  been  unrevealed,  but  as  great  religious 
truths,  which  had,  to  some  extent,  shed  their  light 
on  every  successive  generation  of  believers.  We 
indeed  have  other  evidence  of  the  symbolical  char- 
acter and  signification  of  sacrifices,  but  that  of  the 
12* 


130  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

passage  adverted  to,  was  sufficient  to  indicate  strong- 
ly the  facts  in  respect  to  this  subject. 

6.  The  nature  of  the  subject.  As  in  respect  to 
words,  so  in  respect  to  material  symbols,  the  nature 
of  the  subject  when  otherwise  declared,  contributes 
essentially  to  indicate  the  sense  intended  to  be  con- 
veyed. Material  symbols,  as  well  as  literal  ones, 
ought  to  be  interpreted  according  to  the  known  na- 
ture of  the  subject  to  which  they  refer.  This  rule 
applies  equally  to  symbolical  religious  rites,  and  to 
all  other  symbolical  representations,  which  belong 
to  the  Bible,  The  known  nature  of  the  subject  is, 
in  many  cases,  a  principal  means  of  indicating  the 
sense  of  symbolical  communications.  In  this  re- 
spect, it  performs  the  same  office  in  symbolical  lan- 
guage that  it  does  in  all  other  modes  of  speech, 
whether  literal  or  figurative. 

7.  Synonymous  symbols.  The  same  object  is  some- 
times represented  by  different  symbols.  This  is  true 
in  some  instances,  of  states  and  empires.  Some  of 
the  different  symbols  of  the  book  of  Daniel  and  of 
Revelation,  are  synonymous.  For  example ;  the 
image,  Dan.  ii.  31 — 45,  is  to  a  great  extent  synony- 
mous with  that  of  the  four  beasts,  Dan.  vii.  1 — 14. 
Baptism  is,  to  a  great  extent,  synonymous  with  cir- 
cumcision. Symbols  are  often  in  part  synonymous, 
when  they  are  not  entirely  so.  The  extent  to  which 
this  is  the  case,  ought  to  be  carefully  determined. 
How  far  different  symbolical  representations  are  sy- 
nonymous, is  a  preliminary  inquiry  of  great  import- 
ance, in  reference  to  many  important  parts  of  the 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  131 

Bible.     As  far  as  different  symbols  are  ascertained 
to  be  synonymous,  they  illustrate  each  other. 

8.  Similar  or  analogous  symbolical  imagery.  Ma- 
ny of  the  material  symbols  of  the  Bible  have  a  man- 
ifest resemblance  and  analogy  to  each  other,  as  well 
as  to  the  objects  they  respectively  represent.  This 
is  the  fact  in  respect  to  animals  which  occur  in  pro- 
phetic visions.  The  full  signification  of  some  of  these 
symbolical  animals,  and  other  objects,  is  clearly  re- 
vealed. In  the  interpretation  of  others,  which  are 
not  so  fully  explained,  much  assistance  may  be  often 
derived  from  comparing  them  with  similar  or  analo- 
gous ones  that  are.  Animal  may  be  compared  with 
animal,  and  circumstance  with  circumstance,  to  ad- 
vantage. Much  caution  however,  is  requisite  in 
comparisons  of  this  kind ;  and  no  reliance  ought  to 
be  placed  on  such  resemblances  and  analogies,  as 
are  remote  or  doubtful.  Very  little  weight  is  due 
to  arguments  derived  from  this  source,  when  unsus- 
tained  by  other  kinds  of  evidence.  Supported  by 
other  evidence,  analogies  of  this  kind  may  contrib- 
ute to  establish  many  important  conclusions. 

9.  Symbols  considered  in  respect  to  chronology. 
Material  symbols  represent  things  in  many  of  their 
most  important  relations  and  changes.  But  they  do 
not  designate  the  element  of  time,  with  any  degree 
of  perspicuity  and  precision.  They  often  represent 
objects  and  events  without  any  relation  to  the  peri- 
od to  which  they  belong,  or  through  which  they  ex- 
tend. In  respect  to  symbolical  representations, 
therefore,  the  element  of  time  ought  always  to  be 
supplied,  when  wanting,  from  other  sources  of  in- 


132  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OF 

formation.  Chronological  questions,  in  respect  to 
the  objects  and  events  adumbrated  by  many  of  the 
prophetical  symbols,  are  among  the  most  complica- 
ted and  difficult,  that  arise  in  the  interpretation  of 
the  Scriptures.  In  determining  these,  we  ought  al- 
ways to  consider  the  nature  of  the  symbol,  of  the 
subject  symbolically  represented,  and  the  chronolo- 
gical notices  that  may  occur  respecting  that  subject, 
either  in  the  context,  or  in  other  parts  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. 

For  example  ;  in  Dan.  vii.  4.  the  Babylonian  em- 
pire under  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  represented  by  a  lion 
having  eagle's  wings.  The  transformations  which 
this  symbolical  animal  underwent,  in  being  made  to 
stand  up  like  a  man,  and  in  receiving  a  human  spirit, 
instead  of  that  appropriately  belonging  to  the  lion, 
denote  subsequent  changes  in  that  empire,  without 
marking  in  the  least,  the  precise  period  of  their  oc- 
currence. 

The  fact  that  this  animal  came  out  of  the  sea,  pre- 
vious to  either  of  the  three  others,  mentioned  as 
forming  a  part  of  the  same  prophetic  vision,  indicates 
the  priority  of  the  Babylonian  empire,  in  point  of 
time,  to  either  of  those  symbolically  represented  by 
the  other  animals.  But  neither  the  precise  time  of 
the  commencement  of  this  empire,  or  of  its  continu- 
ance, is  noted  by  the  symbol.  Whether  that  empire 
had  yet  arisen,  or  if  arisen,  how  long  it  had  continu- 
ed at  the  time  of  the  vision,  are  matters  to  be  deter- 
mined by  recurring  to  other  sources  of  information. 

Jn  Rev.  xii.  1 — 4,  we  have  an  account  of  the  ap- 
pearance of  a  symbolical  woman,  clothed  with  the 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  133 

sun,  having  the  moon  under  her  feet,  and  on  her 
head  a  crown  of  twelve  stars,  an  expressive  and 
manifest  emblem  of  the  church  of  God.  As  a  part 
of  the  same  mystical  imagery,  we  meet  with  a  great 
red  dragon,  having  seven  crowned  heads  and  ten 
horns,  and  with  his  tail  casting  down  from  their  or- 
bits a  third  part  of  the  stars  of  heaven  ;  an  equally 
expressive  and  obvious  emblem  of  an  anti-Christian, 
hostile  power,  organized  and  arrayed  against  the 
church.  The  contemporary  appearance  of  these 
symbolical  objects,  indicates  the  co-existence  of  the 
church  and  of  the  opposing  power,  represented  by 
the  dragon  ;  but  does  not  give  the  least  intimation 
of  the  period  when  this  co-existence  commenced,  or 
during  which  it  was  to  continue.  All  information 
respecting  these  objects,  which  involves  the  element 
of  time,  must  be  obtained  from  considering  the  na- 
ture of  the  objects  thus  represented,  and  from  the 
other  sources  of  knowledge  respecting  them. 

Some  chronological  information  is  necessary  to 
explain  the  nature  of  the  events  shadowed  forth  in 
this  vision,  and  seems  to  be  presumed  to  be  attaina- 
ble, to  as  great  an  extent  as  may  be  necessary  for 
this  purpose. 

The  careful  study  of  the  chronology  of  events, 
which  are  symbolically  shadowed  forth,  is  of  great 
importance  to  a  right  understanding  of  symbolical 
imagery.  Errors  in  respect  to  chronology,  lead  to 
many  other  errors  in  reference  to  this  class  of  sub- 
jects. 

The  precise  determination  of  the  chronology  of 
some  events,  symbolically  announced  in  prophecy, 


134  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

is  exceedingly  difficult,  and  perhaps  impossible.  The 
same  is  true  in  regard  to  the  determination  of  the 
precise  nature  of  many  events  thus  indicated.  These 
portions  of  the  inspired  records  ought  to  be  studied 
with  deep  humility  and  continued  attention.  A  has- 
ty or  superficial  investigation  of  them,  is  sure  to  be- 
wilder and  mislead. 

The  binding  and  confinement  of  Satan  for  a  thou- 
sand years,  Rev.  xx.  1 — 6,  and  other  contemporane- 
ous events,  are  of  such  absorbing  interest  however 
interpreted,  as  to  awaken  a  spirit  of  earnest  and 
prayerful  inquiry  into  their  precise  import  and  chro- 
nology, in  every  successive  age  of  the  church.  The 
church  universally  has  manifested  a  degree  of  soli- 
citude to  know  what  is  meant  by  these  symbols,  and 
when  these  predictions  will  be  accomplished.  Few 
questions  are  agitated  with  deeper  interest,  at  the 
present  time,  than  those  which  relate  lo  the  precise 
nature  and  period  of  the  millennium,  here  shadowed 
forth. 

These  questions  however,  cannot  be  satisfactorily 
and  correctly  answered,  without  determining  the 
position  of  this  prophecy  in  respect  to  the  series  of 
prophetic  announcements  ;  ascertaining  and  compar- 
ing synonymous  prophecies,  if  there  are  any  which 
are  manifestly  so  ;  and  also  those  which  are  in  any 
way  nearly  or  remotely  related  to  these,  so  as  to  be 
definitive  of  their  import,  or  indicative  of  their  chro- 
nological relations. 

A  mistake  in  respect  to  the  position  of  this  pro- 
phecy, in  the  chronological  series  of  prophetic  an- 
nouncements, or  in  respect  to  the  determination  of 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  135 

synonymous  or  otherwise  related  predictions,  may 
lead  to  utterly  erroneous  conclusions  respecting  the 
whole  subject. 

10.  Conclusion.  By  an  application  of  the  princi- 
ples and  rules  stated,  and  to  some  extent,  illustrated 
in  the  foregoing  pages,  much  of  the  symbolical  and 
typical  imagery  of  the  Bible  may  be  satisfactorily  un- 
derstood and  explained.  Without  some  knowledge  of. 
them,  this  part  of  Divine  revelation,  is  mostly  a  seal- 
ed book.  It  presents  a  confused  mass  of  images, 
and  shadowy  representations,  but  the  pearl  of  sub- 
stantial and  satisfactory  knowledge,  is  effectually 
concealed  ;  and  the  substance  by  which  these  shad- 
ows are  cast,  entirely  hid. 

The  moment  we  apply  the  legitimate  rules  of  In- 
terpretation, the  chaotic  mass  of  symbolical  imagery 
begins  to  be  reduced  to  order,  and  we  are  enabled  to 
trace  in  it,  the  manifest  indications  of  Divine  intelli- 
gence and  wisdom.  Nothing  can  present  a  more 
uninviting  aspect  than  the  symbolical  imagery  of  the 
Bible,  to  one  that  is  entirely  unacquainted  with  the 
principles  and  rules,  by  an  application  of  which,  its 
mysteries  are  in  a  measure,  at  least,  unfolded.  It  is 
like  Greek  or  Hebrew,  to  one  acquainted  merely 
with  the  characters  in  which  those  languages  are 
written,  but  ignorant  both  of  the  meaning  of  the 
words,  and  of  their  principles  of  construction.  On 
this  ground  even  honest  Christians  are  sometimes 
confounded,  and  almost  ready  to  stumble  into  unbe- 
lief and  infidelity.  But  let  a  few  rays  of  the  sun 
light  of  knowledge  be  poured  in  upon  the  scene,  and 
it  becomes  bright  with  unnumbered  hues  of  heavenly 


136  PARTICULAR   LAWS   OF 

lustre,  and  celestial  radiance.  We  are  at  once  in- 
ducted into  one  of  the  most  beautiful  and  splendid 
apartments  of  the  temple  of  Scriptural  knowledge  ; 
and  discover  in  the  very  symbols  which  were  before 
an  occasion  of  difficulty,  and  rock  of  offence,  the 
most  delightful  and  convincing  proofs  of  the  divinity 
of  our  holy  religion. 

Sec  4.     General  principles  relating  to  the 
prophecies. 

1.  A  prophecy  is  a  prediction  or  declaration  of 
something  to  come.  A  considerable  part  of  the  Bi- 
ble is  of  a  prophetic  character.  Predictions  of  fu- 
ture events  occur  in  the  books  of  Moses,  in  the  suc- 
ceeding historical  books,  in  the  books  of  the  proph- 
ets, properly  so  called,  in  the  gospels  and  epistles  of 
the  New  Testament ;  and  are  brought  to  a  splendid 
and  glorious  conclusion  in  the  book  of  Revelation. 
They  consist  either  of  verbal  communications,  re- 
ceived directly  from  God,  or  from  some  divinely  au- 
thorized messenger  ;  or  else  of  supernatural  views, 
excited  in  the  mind  or  the  prophet  by  the  silent  ope- 
ration of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  or  else  of  visions  and 
dreams,  produced  by  the  same  Divine  influence. 

2.  Prophecy  corresponds  to  history.  It  is  like 
that,  a  description  of  events.  It  differs  from  history 
in  being  written  before  the  events  referred  to,  have 
taken  place,  and  before  they  are  capable  of  being  as- 
certained by  the  ordinary  sources  of  information.  It 
is  generally  less  definite  and  particular  than  histor- 
ical narratives  ;  but  like  history,  it  is  expected  in  all 
cases  to  give  a  faithful  and  true  delineation  of  the 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  137 

events  referred  to,  and  one  that  shall  distinguish 
them  from  all  others. 

In  many  cases  the  language  of  prophecy  is  as  ex- 
plicit and  distinguishing  as  any  part  of  the  Scriptures, 
or  as  language  can  be.  Many  of  the  prophecies  are 
of  obvious  import,  and  require  but  an  ordinary  de- 
gree of  attention  to  be  correctly  and  fully  understood. 
Many  that  would  otherwise  be  difficult  and  perhaps 
unintelligible  to  us,  are  explained,  either  in  the  con- 
text to  which  they  belong,  or  in  other  parts  of  the 
Bible.  Many  however,  are  left  obscure,  and  require 
to  be  diligently  and  perseveringly  studied,  in  order 
to  be  understood. 

3.  The  peculiar  obscurity  of  the  prophecies,  arises 
in  most  cases  from  the  following  circumstances. 

(1.)  The  entire  want  of  chronological  notices,  or 
else  the  use  of  but  hw,  and  those  mostly  of  an  inde- 
finite character. 

(2.)  The  free  and  extensive  use  of  tropical  or  fig- 
urative language,  with  less  means  of  distinguishing 
what  is  figurative,  and  less  facilities  for  determining 
the  precise  signification  of  figurative  expressions, 
than  are  enjoyed  in  other  departments  of  Interpre- 
tation. 

(3.)  The  use  of  a  great  variety  of  material  types 
and  symbols,  many  of  which  are  not  accompanied 
with  any  explicit  declaration  of  their  proper  and  true 
meaning. 

Frequent  and  explicit  chronological  notices,  con- 
tribute much  to  the  perspicuity  of  history.  The  in- 
frequency  and  indefiniteness  of  these,  in  many  of 

the  prophecies,  occasion  the  same  obscurity  in  this 
13 


138  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OF 

part  of  the  Divine  communications,  which  they 
would  occasion  in  history  if  admitted  there. 

The  difficulty  of  distinguishing  many  of  the  pro- 
phetic tropes  or  figures  of  speech,  from  literal  ex- 
pressions, arises  in  part  from  our  not  being  able  to 
compare  and  identify  the  description  with  the  event, 
as  we  uniformly  do  in  historical  narratives.  Words 
and  phrases  used  in  respect  to  a  known  event,  are 
rendered  definite  by  the  event,  when  they  would 
otherwise  be  of  an  opposite  character.  This  cause 
of  obscurity  operates  in  respect  to  all  those  prophe- 
cies which  are  not  known  to  be  accomplished,  and 
which  are  not  illustrated  by  the  actual  occurrences 
they  decribe.  It  ceases  as  soon  as  prophecies  are 
known  to  be  accomplished. 

This  cause  of  obscurity  arises  from  the  very  na- 
ture of  prophecy,  as  a  description  or  intimation  of 
future  events.  It  is  impossible  for  words  to  convey 
as  definite  conceptions  in  respect  to  many  events 
while  future,  as  they  may  do  in  respect  to  the  same, 
when  past.  If  there  were  no  other  causes  of  obscu- 
rity, this  of  itself  would  be  sufficient  to  render  the 
interpretation  of  many  prophecies  which  are  yet  un- 
fulfilled, a  matter  of  peculiar  difficulty. 

God  however,  has  undoubtedly  important  reasons, 
aside  from  the  principles  or  imperfections  of  lan- 
guage, for  shedding  some  degree  of  obscurity  over 
this  part  of  his  word. 

Were  these  developments  made  in  every  case  so 
clear  that  they  could  not  be  easily  misunderstood, 
they  would  probably  often  prove  a  serious  obsta- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  139 

de  to  their  own  fulfilment,  and  to  the  accomplish- 
ment of  the  Divine  purposes* 

The  extensive  use  of  tropical  or  symbolical  lan- 
guage, even  at  the  expense  of  perspicuity  and  pre- 
cision, is  on  this  principle  fully  authorized  and  in- 
deed loudly  demanded. 

Tropical  and  symbolical  representations  shadow 
forth  the  events  of  futurity  with  sufficient  precision 
to  answer  the  purposes  for  which  prophecy  is  given ; 
but  not  to  impede  their  own  fulfilment.  We  have 
therefore,  in  the  very  structure  of  the  prophetic 
Scriptures,  as  well  as  in  their  supernatural  announce- 
ments of  truth,  the  indications  of  that  Divine  wis- 
dom, under  the  guidance  of  which,  every  part  of  the 
Bible  was  written. 

The  figurative  character  of  the  prophecies,  and 
the  general  terms  in  which  many  of  them  are  ex- 
pressed, render  a  careful  discrimination  of  figurative 
from  literal  expressions,  highly  important,  and  in 
some  cases  difficult. 

The  general  principles  of  language,  however,  ap- 
ply equally  to  the  determination  of  all  questions 
relative  to  the  tropical  use  of  words  in  the  prophe- 
cies, and  in  every  other  part  of  the  Scriptures. 
These  principles,  if  duly  regarded,  will  in  most  cases 
lead  to  correct  and  certain  conclusions.  They  sel- 
dom lead  to  error,  if  truly  followed.  If  we  fall  into 
errors  on  this  subject,  it  will  be  in  spite  of  them,  not 
in  conformity  with  their  direction. 

Cherishing  due  respect  for  these  principles,  we 
shall  never  depart  from  the  literal  interpretation  of 
words,  without  evident  reason  and  necessity,  in  the 


140  PARTICULAR    LAWS    Ot 

prophecies,  any  more  than  in  other  portions  of  the 
Bible.  But  when  manifest  indications  of  a  figura- 
tive or  tropical  sense  exist,  we  should  interpret  the 
words  to  which  they  relate  accordingly. 

These  indications  are  literal  incongruity  or  incor- 
rectness; definitive  clauses  and  circumstances  re- 
quiring a  figurative  interpretation  of  the  words  to 
which  they  relate  ;  a  literal  disagreement  of  parallel 
predictions  ;  a  manifest  allusion  to  earlier  occurren- 
ces, either  in  Jewish  or  general  history  ;  to  existing 
objects  and  institutions,  and  to  distinguished  individ- 
uals. 

Most  of  these  principles  have  been  sufficiently  il- 
lustrated. The  use  of  figurative  expressions  taken 
from  past  occurrences,  from  existing  objects  and  in- 
stitutions, and  from  distinguished  persons,  is  common 
to  every  class  of  writers,  particularly  poets  and  ora- 
tors. It  is  not  strange  therefore,  that  they  should  be  of 
frequent  occurrence  in  the  prophecies  of  the  Bible, 
many  of  which  are  written  in  poetry  of  the  most  im- 
passioned character. 

The  Hebrew  writers  understood  too  well  the  pro- 
lific sources  of  powerful  and  heart  stirring  imagery, 
which  were  furnished  them  in  the  stupendous  events 
of  their  national  history;  in  their  religious  institu- 
tions ;  and  also  in  distinguished  individuals  that 
adorned  their  annals  ;  not  to  draw  from  these  sour- 
ces for  the  improvement  of  their  poetry  and  elo- 
quence. 

Under  the  fervor  of  the  highest  poetic  excitement, 
and  the  still  higher  influences  of  inspiration,  we  find 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  141 

them  using  the  most  sublime  and  varied  imagery, 
with  the  most  powerful  effect.  They  unite  the 
greatest  boldness  and  vigor  of  conception,  with  the 
greatest  refinement  and  delicacy  of  taste.  Some  of 
their  highest  poetic  efforts,  and  some  of  their  noblest 
productions  were  put#  forth  under  the  influence  of 
the  Spirit  of  prophecy.  Those  productions  ought  to 
be  interpreted  in  the  bold  and  impassioned  spirit  in 
which  they  were  written,  in  order  to  be  interpreted 
aright. 

Under  an  overpowering  sense  of  coming  events, 
they  made  use  of  the  most  sublime  imagery  at  their 
command,  for  the  purpose  of  embodying  and  setting 
forth  their  strong  conceptions.  If  Zion  is  to  be  de- 
livered from  her  low  estate  ;  they  talk  of  the  de- 
struction of  the  Egyptian  sea,  and  the  drying  up  of 
rivers,  that  men  may  go  over  dry  shod.  Isa.  xi.  15, 
16.  To  describe  the  Divine  protection  of  the  saints 
in  future  years ;  they  speak  of  the  creation  of  the 
cloud  of  smoke  by  day,  and  the  fire  by  night,  on  all 
their  dwellings,  and  around  all  their  assemblies.  Isa. 
iv.  5.  The  future  piety  of  the  church,  is  set  forth 
under  the  figure  of  a  continual  sacrifice,  whereby 
the  priests  and  Levites  shall  be  constantly  employ- 
ed. Jer.  xxxiii.  18.  A  distinguished  prophet,  they 
call  Elijah,  Mai.  iv.  5,  and  our  blessed  Lord,  they 
designate  by  the  appellation  of  David,  and  represent 
him  like  that  honored  prince,  both  as  a  faithful  shep- 
herd and  mighty  king.  Ezek.  xxxiv.  23,  24 ;  xxxvii. 

24,  25 ;  Hosea  iii.  5. 

13* 


142  particular  laws  of 

Sec.  5.    Rules    for  determining   the  signifi- 
cation OF   THE   PROPHECIES. 

1.  All  the  usual  principles  and  rules  for  determin- 
ing the  signification  of  words  and  other  symbols,  are 
applicable  to  the  prophecies.  A  faithful  applica- 
tion of  them  all,  is  of  indispensable  necessity  to  the 
right  interpretation  of  this  part  of  the  Scriptures. 

2.  The  position  of  any  particular  prophecy  in  re- 
spect to  the  time  and  circumstances  of  its  delivery, 
often  contributes  to  illustrate  its  true  meaning.  This 
is  the  fact  in  respect  to  every  species  of  discourse, 
but  it  is  emphatically  so  in  respect  to  the  prophecies. 
The  first  step  therefore  to  be  taken,  in  the  interpre- 
tation of  a  prophetic  discourse,  is  to  determine,  if 
possible,  the  time  when  it  was  delivered,  and  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  prophet  and  people  at  that  time. 
In  some  cases  these  are  expressly  declared  ;  as  in 
Isa.  vi.  1.  "In  the  year  that  king  Uzziah  died,  I 
saw  also  the  Lord  sitting  upon  a  throne, "  &c.  This 
is  an  explicit  declaration  of  the  time  of  the  prophet- 
ic vision  which  follows.  The  circumstances  of  the 
people  at  that  time,  to  whom  the  prophecy  was  ad- 
dressed, are  described  with  sufficient  clearness  in 
other  parts  of  the  Old  Testament. 

In  the  succeeding  chapter  we  have  another  dis- 
course, represented  as  being  delivered  in  the  time  of 
Ahaz,  and  of  course  more  than  sixteen  years  later 
than  the  preceding  ;  since  the  reign  of  Jotham,  which 
continued  sixteen  years,  must  have  intervened. 

In  some  cases  when  the  date  of  a  prophetical  dis- 
course is  not  expressly  given,  it  may  be  inferred 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  143 

from  an  inspection  of  the  context,  or  of  the  discourse 
itself.  It  may  be  indicated  by  some  expression  re- 
ferring to  contemporary  objects  or  events,  the  dates 
of  which  are  capable  of  being  nearly  or  accurately 
ascertained. 

This  is  the  case  with  the  prophecy  contained  in 
the  first  chapter  of  Isaiah.  In  the  6th  and  7th  verses 
of  this  chapter,  the  land  of  Judah  is  described  as  be- 
ing desolated  by  enemies,  and  the  condition  of  the 
people  as  being  one  of  extreme  depression  and  dis- 
tress. By  turning  to  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chron- 
icles, we  find  that  the  description  above  referred  to, 
cannot  have  indicated  the  state  of  things  in  the  pros- 
perous reign  of  Uzziah,  or  in  that  of  Jotham;  but 
that  it  accords  perfectly  with  the  state  of  that  coun- 
try in  the  disastrous  reign  of  Ahaz.  Hence  we  infer 
with  considerable  confidence,  that  the  prophecy  con- 
tained in  this  chapter,  was  delivered  in  the  reign  of 
Ahaz,  and  in  view  of  the  disastrous  consequences  of 
that  prevailing  impiety,  for  which  he  was,  in  common 
with  many  others,  distinguished,  more  than  sixteen 
years  later  than  the  6th  chapter  of  the  same  book. 

Too  much  attention  cannot  be  given  to  the  subject 
of  determining  as  accurately  as  possible,  the  dates  of 
prophetical  discourses  ;  preparatory  to  interpreting 
them.  In  making  these  determinations,  it  ought  to 
be  borne  in  mind,  that  the  different  prophetical  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  are  not  arranged  in  their  pro- 
per chronological  order.  Jonah  prophesied  much 
earlier  than  Isaiah,  though  his  book  is  considerably 
the  latest  in  the  sacred  volume.  The  prophetic 
books  are  arranged  not  in  chronological  order,  but 


144  PARTICULAR    LAWS  OF 

in  that  of  their  comparative  magnitudes.     The  lar- 
ger books  are  placed  first,  and  the  smaller,  last. 

A  similar  arrangement  was  adopted  in  regard  to 
the  epistles  of  the  New  Testament.  The  longer 
epistles  are,  for  the  most  part,  placed  before  the 
shorter,  in  the  order  of  their  comparative  lengths. 
The  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  the  book  of  Revela- 
tion, are  for  particular  reasons  made  exceptions  to 
this  general  rule. 

The  different  parts  of  the  same  book,  do  not,  in 
all  cases,  stand  in  their  proper  chronological  order. 
A  probable  instance  of  this  has  been  given  in  respect 
to  the  first  chapter  of  Isaiah,  which,  in  the  order  of 
time,  is  later  than  the  sixth.  Another  instance  of 
this  kind  occurs  in  Ezek.  xxix.  17 — 21.  This  proph- 
ecy is  dated  the  twenty-seventh  year  of  the  captivi- 
ty of  Jehoichin,  at  which  time  Ezekiel  became  a  cap- 
tive, while  that  which  commences  in  Ezek.  xxxi. 
1,  is  declared  to  have  been  communicated  in  the  elev- 
enth, making  a  difference  of  sixteen  years. 

This  irregularity  probably  arose  from  the  fact, 
that  the  different  prophetical  discourses  composing 
a  book,  were  first  published  separately,  and  not  till 
after  the  deaths  of  the  writers,  collected  into  one  vol- 
ume. When  they  were  collected  and  put  together 
in  the  same  volume,  there  was  no  very  thorough  ex- 
amination of  their  chronological  relations,  in  conse- 
quence of  which  some  were  placed  out  of  their  pro- 
per chronological  positions. 

3.  All  the  parts  of  a  prophetical  discourse,  taken 
together,  mutually  illustrate  each  other.  They  ought 
therefore,  to  be  studied  in  their  mutual  relations  to 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION  145 

each  other  as  constituent  parts  of  the  same  discourse, 
and  not  as  separate  discourses.  A  course,  the  op- 
posite of  this  is  often  pursued.  Many  persons  study 
the  Bible  by  chapters,  and  endeavor  to  interpret  ev- 
ery chapter  by  itself.  If  the  beginning  of  every 
chapter  was  the  beginning  of  a  discourse,  and  the 
termination  of  it  the  termination  of  the  same,  the 
method  of  studying  the  Bible  by  chapters,  would  be 
correct.  But  the  division  of  chapters  does  not  bear 
any  correspondence  to  the  division  of  subjects  and 
discourses.  We  ought  therefore,  in  our  study  of  the 
Bible,  especially  the  prophetic  parts  of  it,  to  ascer- 
tain the  real  divisions  in  respect  to  subjects,  and  dis- 
courses, and  to  investigate  every  discourse  by  itself. 
Some  prophetic  discourses  occupy  but  part  of  a  chap- 
ter ;  and  some  occupy  several  chapters.  If  sufficient 
pains  is  taken  to  ascertain  the  natural  divisions  of 
this  kind,  they  will  generally  be  discovered,  and  will 
contribute  essentially  to  facilitate  the  interpretation 
of  difficult  words  and  paragraphs. 

4.  The  leading  subject  of  a  prophetical  discourse, 
contributes  to  define  many  assertions  which  have 
relation  to  it. 

For  example  ;  in  Matt.  xxv.  31 — 46  ;  the  leading 
subject  of  the  discourse  is  the  general  judgment. 
All  the  elements  of  that  scene  are  present,  and  stand 
out  with  a  degree  of  prominence,  which  renders  it 
difficult  to  be  mistaken  in  respect  to  that  subject. 
After  becoming  fully  convinced  from  an  examina- 
tion of  this  passage,  and  of  the  context,  that  the  gen- 
eral judgment  is  the  real  subject  to  which  it  relates  ; 


146  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OF 

we  are  authorized  to  explain  the  different  parts  of  it 
accordingly. 

A  knowledge  of  the  leading  subject  treated  of, 
makes  the  explanation  of  every  subordinate  part 
of  the  discourse  easy,  where,  without  any  assist- 
ance from  this  source,  many  important  phrases 
would  be  difficult,  if  not  inexplicable.  The  same 
words  may  have  very  different  meanings,  according 
to  the  nature  of  the  subject  to  which  they  are  ap- 
plied ;  and  the  connexions  in  which  they  stand. 

5.  Events  which  are  mentioned  continuously, 
ought  to  be  carefully  distinguished  from  each  other. 
Events  may  be  continuous,  as  represented  on  the 
chart  of  prophecy,  when  in  fulfilment,  they  are  sep- 
arated by  the  lapse  of  centuries.  Where  events  are 
clearly  predicted,  the  precise  times  of  their  accom- 
plishment are  often  concealed.  They  are  often 
grouped  together  in  prophecy,  as  well  as  in  other 
kinds  of  discourse,  in  consequence  of  some  general 
relation  of  resemblance  or  contrast,  when  in  point 
of  time  they  are  widely  separated  from  each  other. 

We  are  not  therefore,  to  infer,  because  events  are 
described  or  referred  to  in  immediate  succession, 
or  make  a  part  of  the  same  discourse,  that  their  oc- 
currence will  be  either  contemporaneous  or  contig- 
uous. The  reverse  is  often  true.  For  example ; 
the  sufferings  of  the  Redeemer,  and  the  feeble  begin- 
nings of  his  kingdom,  are  often  predicted  in  connex- 
ion with  the  triumphant  and  universal  establishment 
of  his  spiritual  reign,  while  they  are  separated  by 
the  lapse  of  many  centuries. 

Inattention  to  this  fact,  has  occasioned  frequent 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  147 

and  serious  errors  in  prophetical  interpretation,  both 
in  ancient  and  modern  times. 

The  24th  chapter  of  Matthew,  sufficiently  difficult 
at  best,  has  been  rendered  unnecessarily  so,  by  a  neg- 
lect of  the  principle  stated  in  this  paragraph.  The 
subjects  treated  of  in  the  discourse  commencing  in 
that  chapter,  are  mentioned  explicitly  in  the  second 
and  third  verses,  and  are  the  following,  namely  ; 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  the  future  coming,  or 
second  advent  of  Christ,  and  the  end  of  the  world  ; 
events  entirely  distinct,  though  treated  of  continu- 
ously in  the  prophetical  discourse  which  relates  to 
them. 

Matt.  xxiv.  4 — 28,  commencing  the  discourse  of 
our  Lord  in  answer  to  these  questions,  evidently  re- 
lates to  the  first  exclusively,  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem. Matthew  xxiv.  29 — 31,  treats  of  the  second 
advent  of  Christ,  and  of  accompanying  and  prece- 
ding events.  This  passage  is  as  follows  :  "  Immedi- 
ately after  the  tribulation  of  those  days,  shall  the  sun 
be  darkened,  and  the  moon  shall  not  give  her  light, 
and  the  stars  shall  fall  from  heaven,  and  the  powers 
of  the  heavens  shall  be  shaken.  And  then  shall  ap- 
pear the  sign  of  the  Son  of  Man  in  heaven  ;  and  then 
shall  all  the  tribes  of  the  earth  mourn,  and  they  shall 
see  the  Son  of  Man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven, 
with  power  and  great  glory.  And  he  shall  send  his 
angels  with  a  great  sound  of  a  trumpet,  and  they 
shall  gather  together  his  elect  from  the  four  winds, 
from  one  end  of  heaven  to  the  other." 

Having  given  a  brief  but  vivid  and  forcible  de- 
scription of  these  two  events,  the  destruction  of  Je- 


148  PARTICULAR   LAWS   OP 

rusalem,  and  his  second  advent,  the  Redeemer  pro- 
ceeds to  remark  on  the  former,  in  Matt.  xxiv.  32 — 
35,  under  the  appellation  of  these  things,  and  says  : 
This  generation  shall  not  pass  away,  till  all  these 
things,  the  things  relating  to  the  first  mentioned 
event,  shall  be  fulfilled.  The  36th  and  following 
verses,  refer  to  the  latter  event,  the  second  advent  of 
Christ,  under  the  appellation  of  that  day.  But  of 
that  day  and  that  hour,  that  is,  the  day  and  hour,  or 
in  other  words,  the  precise  time  of  the  second  ad- 
vent, knoweth  no  man  ;  no,  not  the  angels  of  hea- 
ven, but  my  Pother  only.  Here  is  a  manifest  an- 
tithesis between  these  things  of  the  33d  verse,  being 
known  and  near,  and  that  day,  of  the  36th  verse,  be- 
ing unknown  to  man  or  angel.  The  subjects  there- 
fore of  the^e  verses  must  be  different,  and  can 
be  no  other  than  those  which  have  been  specified. 
The  same  thing  is  not  both  known  and  unknown, 
revealed  and  un revealed. 

The  appellation  that  day,  is  applied  to  denote  the 
period  of  the  second  advent,  in  2  Tim.  iv.  8  ;  "  Hence- 
forth there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteous- 
ness, which  the  Lord,  the  righteous  judge  shall  give 
me  at  that  day."  What  particular  day  the  apostle 
means,  he  does  not  here  specify.  He  uses  the  phrase, 
that  day,  as  one  which  was  too  well  understood  to 
need  explanation  ;  and  can  mean  nothing  else  by  it, 
than  the  day  of  the  Lord,  which  will  come  as  a  thief 
in  the  night  to  the  wicked,  and  in  which  the  heavens 
shall  pass  away,  and  the  earth  be  destroyed.  2  Pet. 
iii.  10, 12. 

6.  The  prophecies  considered  as  embracing  one 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  149 

connected  and  continuous  chain  of  events,  contribute 
to  illustrate  each  other.  They  ought  therefore  to 
be  studied  together,  in  order  to  be  most  perfectly  un- 
derstood. All  interpretations  of  them,  in  which  their 
relations  to  each  other  are  not  duly  regarded,  are 
manifestly  wrong.  When  we  have  ascertained  the 
place  of  a  particular  prediction  in  the  chain  of  pro- 
phetic announcements,  we  have  gained  an  important 
point  in  the  determination  of  its  precise  signification. 

Almost  every  part  of  the  prophetic  writings  has 
some  relation  to  other  parts  of  the  same.  In  order 
to  understand  one  such  part  well,  we  must  contem- 
plate it  in  connexion  with  other  parts  of  the  same  to 
which  it  is  related.  In  order  to  understand  well,  a 
part  of  a  prophetical  book,  we  ought  to  study  the 
whole,  and  in  order  to  understand  one  book,  we 
ought  to  study  others,  especially  those  which  relate 
to  the  same  period  of  time,  and  the  same  or  similar 
events. 

7.  Every  prophecy  ought  to  be  interpreted  as 
having  one  true  meaning,  and  only  one  ;  and  as  cor- 
responding in  this  respect  to  history.  The  meaning 
of  a  single  prediction  may  be  very  comprehensive, 
embracing  under  a  general  designation,  a  great  vari- 
ety of  particulars  ;  and  those  extending  over  a  great 
length  of  time.  But  they  constitute  a  single  consist- 
ent sense,  not  a  variety  of  independent  senses. 

Many  of  the  predictions  of  the  Bible  are  of  this 
general  character,  and  receive  a  gradual  and  pro- 
gressive fulfilment,  which  it  requires  centuries  to 

complete. 

14 


150  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OF 

Of  this  general  character,  is  the  remarkable  pre- 
diction of  Noah,  Gen.  ix.  25 — 27.  "  And  he  said, 
cursed  be  Canaan,  a  servant  of  servants  shall  he  be 
to  his  brethren.  And  he  said,  blessed  be  the  Lord 
God  of  Shem,  and  Canaan  shall  be  his  servant. 
God  shall  enlarge  Japheth,  and  he  shall  dwell  in  the 
tents  of  Shem,  and  Canaan  shall  be  his  servant.1' 

The  names  of  these  several  patriarchs,  are  used 
by  metonymy,  to  denote  their  descendants.  The 
prophecy  therefore  relates  to  the  fortunes  of  the  hu- 
man race.  It  has  no  limitation  in  respect  to  time  ; 
it  may  therefore  be  taken  in  its  most  general  sense, 
as  extending  indefinitely  into  the  future. 

The  general  condition  of  these  great  portions  of 
the  human  family,  has  in  every  successive  generation 
borne  a  remarkable  correspondence  to  these  early 
predictions  ;  and  shown  them  to  be  of  extensive  im- 
port, as  from  the  very  terms  in  which  they  are  ex- 
pressed, we  might  suppose  them  to  be.  The  pro- 
tracted series  of  events  which  correspond  to  these 
early  intimations  of  the  Divine  purposes,  constitutes 
one  comprehensive  but  single  accomplishment  of  the 
same. 

Many  of  the  Scripture  prophecies  which  relate  to 
the  rise  and  fall  of  kingdoms,  are  of  this  general  de- 
scription ;  many  of  those  which  relate  to  the  triumph- 
ant establishment  and  universal  prevalence  of  the 
kingdom  of  Christ,  are  of  the  same  character.  The 
numerous  subordinate  events  which  constitute  the  ful- 
filment of  the  prophecies  here  referred  to,  are  partly 
simultaneous  and  partly  successive.  But  they  do 
not  authorize  the  adoption  of  any  other  modes  of  in- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  151 

terpretation  than  those  which  apply  to  other  depart- 
ments of  human  language.  Therefore  they  ought 
to  be  interpreted  in  conformity  with  the  principles 
which  apply  to  the  interpretation  of  language  gene- 
rally ;  and  which  have  been  explained  in  the  forego- 
ing pages. 

8.  The  history  of  the  period,  and  of  the  events  to 
which  prophecies  relate,  contribute  essentially  to  il- 
lustrate their  true  meaning.  Predictions  derive  illus- 
tration from  the  history  of  the  times  and  events  to 
which  they  refer,  on  the  principle  that  a  general  de- 
scription is  illustrated  by  a  more  definite  one.  The 
prophecies  are  mostly  general.  History  is  more 
particular  and  precise  in  its  disclosures.  The  latter 
therefore,  affords  essential  aid  in  giving  precision  and 
accuracy  to  our  understanding  of  the  former. 

The  Bible  contains  a  complete  history  of  the  ful- 
filment of  many  of  its  prophecies.  This  is  the  fact 
in  regard  to  many  which  relate  to  the  Jewish,  and 
to  other  nations  of  ancient  times ;  and  also  to 
Christ,  and  the  church. 

Later  ecclesiastical  and  general  history  contribute 
still  further  to  illustrate  the  prophetic  announce- 
ments of  the  Bible,  and  ought  to  be  made  use  of  for 
this  purpose.  History  is  one  of  the  most  important 
keys  to  the  correct  understanding  of  the  prophecies ; 
and  if  studied  in  connexion  with  them,  can  hardly  fail 
of  affording  valuable  aid  in  determining  their  proper 
and  true  sense,  to  a  greater  extent  than  is  attainable 
by  any  other  means. 

9.  All  those  interpretations  of  the  prophecies  in 
which  the  events  supposed  to  be  predicted,  do  not 


152  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

correspond  to  the  prediction,  must  be  erroneous.  In- 
terpretations of  this  objectionable  character,  are  by- 
no  means  uncommon.  They  are  often  resorted  to 
for  the  purpose  of  supporting  an  erroneous  theory  ; 
and  so  far  as  prophecy  is  concerned,  may  often  be 
detected  by  the  manifest  want  of  correspondence  be- 
tween the  prediction,  and  the  events  supposed  to  be 
indicated. 

This  rule  is  at  once  obvious  and  highly  useful. 
An  application  of  it,  shows  the  incorrectness  of  those 
interpretations  which  wrest  some  portions  of  the  24th 
and  25th  of  Matthew,  from  their  obvious  import, 
and  apply  them  entirely  to  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  other  preceding  and  contemporaneous 
events. 

The  prophetic  account  of  the  advent  of  Christ, 
contained  in  those  chapters,  and  of  the  general  judg- 
ment, in  which  all  nations  are  to  be  concerned,  and 
their  destinies  of  happiness  or  misery  decided  upon  ; 
has  nothing  properly  corresponding  with  it,  in  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  or  in  any  preceding  or  con- 
temporaneous events.  There  was  no  visible  advent 
of  Christ  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  or  on  the 
day  of  pentecost,  when  the  Holy  Spirit  was  mi- 
raculously poured  out.  There  was  no  general  judg- 
ment at  those  times,  in  which  all  nations  were  con- 
cerned ;  no  public  reception  of  the  righteous  into 
glory,  or  banishment  of  the  wicked  into  a  state  of 
misery  and  despair.  All  things  continued  as  they 
were.  The  righteous  were  still  liable  to  insult  and 
injury,  and  the  wicked  often  prosperous  and  insolent. 
The  saints  were  no  more  in  possession  of  the  king- 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  153 

dom  prepared  for  them  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world,  than  they  ever  had  been ;  neither  were  the 
wicked  essentially  more  obnoxious  to  punishment 
than  before. 

For  these  and  other  similar  reasons,  therefore,  we 
may  safely  and  confidently  conclude,  that  all  the  pre- 
dictions contained  in  these  chapters  did  not  receive 
their  accomplishment  at  the  time,  or  in  the  period 
referred  to. 

All  prophecy  must  have  a  proper  fulfilment;  but 
the  events  connected  with  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem, or  belonging  to  that  period  of  the  world,  do  not 
constitute,  in  any  degree,  a  proper  fulfilment  of  the 
prophecies  in  question.  They  cannot  therefore,  be 
the  events  referred  to  by  those  predictions. 

Sec.  6.    The  interpretation  of  the  bible  con- 
sidered AS  A  TRANSLATION. 

The  rules  or  laws  of  Interpretation  which  have 
been  laid  down  and  illustrated  in  the  foregoing  pages, 
apply  equally  to  the  Scriptures  in  any  language, 
whether  ancient  or  modern.  They  apply  to  the 
original  Hebrew  and  Greek,  and  to  all  the  different 
translations  of  the  same.  No  translations  however, 
can  equal  the  originals  in  accuracy  and  precision. 
The  original  Scriptures  are  the  production  of  God  ; 
translations  are  the  work  of  men  ;  and  though  ma- 
ny of  them  have  been  executed  with  the  greatest 
fidelity,  they  are  not  absolutely  perfect. 

To  assume  that  every  word,  and  phrase,  and  sen- 
tence, in  so  large  and  difficult  a  work  as  the  Bible, 
has  been  translated  with  perfect  accuracy  and  pre- 

14* 


154  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

cision,  so  as  to  answer  fully  all  the  purposes  of  the 
original,  is  to  indulge  a  degree  of  extravagance  on 
this  subject,  that  is  nearly  unparalleled  in  other  de- 
partments of  the  exercise  of  reason,  and  utterly  un- 
authorized and  inexcusable.  It  is  to  be  presumed 
that  some  words  and  phrases,  and  even  sentences, 
in  the  best  translations  of  the  Bible,  will  fail  to  ex- 
press the  precise  and  full  import  of  the  original. 

The  English  reader  wishes  to  know,  and  needs  in 
many  cases  to  be  informed,  how  he  can  determine 
the  correctness  of  the  translation  in  common  use,  in 
any  particular  and  important  doctrinal  passages.  The 
difficulties  in  which  this  subject  is  involved,  have 
probably  discouraged  some  from  even  seriously  at- 
tempting to  settle  their  belief  in  regard  to  Biblical 
doctrines  of  fundamental  importance.  They  have 
furnished  a  plausible  excuse  for  skepticism  and  er- 
ror, to  such  as  love  darkness  rather  than  light,  be- 
cause their  deeds  are  evil. 

But  honest  and  earnest  inquirers  after  truth,  need 
not  fall  into  despair  or  discouragement,  though  una- 
ble to  explore  the  depths  of  ancient  learning.  Truth 
may  be  ascertained,  as  far  as  it  is  necessary  to  the 
attainment  of  savii  g  faith  and  Christian  practice. 
The  following  principles  are  obvious  and  important 
in  their  relation  to  the  Scriptures  considered  as  a 
translation. 

1.  Where  there  is  a  known  difference  between  a 
part  of  the  translation  and  the  original,  the  latter 
ought  always  to  be  preferred  and  followed.  Such 
differences  necessarily  exist,  and  some  of  them  are 
indicated  to  the  common  reader  by  the  most  decisive 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  155 

evidence.  Where  they  do  exist,  we  ought  to  use 
our  endeavors  to  ascertain  them,  and  form  our  judg- 
ments accordingly. 

To  exalt  any  translation  above  the  original,  when 
a  discrepancy  is  perceived,  is  an  instance  of  extreme 
folly,  and  of  manifest  prejudice. 

2.  Every  part  of  the  translation  should  be  presum- 
ed to  be  right,  till  we  find  evidence  that  it  is  wrong. 
To  suspect  the  correctness  of  every  part  of  a  trans- 
lation, because  it  is  inevitable  from  the  nature  of  the 
case,  that  some  parts  should  be  imperfect,  is  unrea- 
sonable and  erroneous.  To  set  aside  a  passage  of 
Scripture,  or  explain  away  its  obvious  meaning,  on 
the  ground  of  a  merely  supposed  inaccuracy  in  the 
translation,  is  to  act  in  a  manner  utterly  arbitrary 
and  unreasonable,  as  well  as  delusive. 

3.  In  all  cases  where  the  correctness  of  the  trans- 
lation is  called  in  question,  we  ought  to  decide  that 
question  according  to  evidence.  Conjectural  decis- 
ions on  such  a  subject,  as  on  all  others,  are  entirely 
unwarranted.  The  sources  of  evidence  on  this  sub- 
ject are  various.  The  following  are  particularly  wor- 
thy of  consideration:  (1.)  the  testimony  of  learned 
men  ;  (2.)  a  consideration  of  their  arguments  in  re- 
lation to  any  case  in  hand  ;  (3.)  other  passages  in 
which  the  same  original  word  may  be  known  to  be 
used  ;  (4.)  the  known  nature  of  the  subject ;  (5.)  the 
context,  <fec. 

A  translation  which  is  supported  by  these  differ- 
ent sources  of  evidence,  must  be  right ;  one  which 
is  manifestly  disproved  by  any  one  of  them,  is  there- 
by shown  to  be  wrong. 


156  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OP 

4.  The  general  agreement  of  commentators  and 
other  learned  men,  in  regard  to  the  correctness  of  a 
translation,  may  be  safely  relied  on  as  indicating  the 
truth.  If  several  different  commentators  or  other 
learned  men,  professing  to  have  satisfactory  and  cer- 
tain knowledge  of  the  subject,  decide  that  a  partic- 
ular passage  of  Scripture  is  correctly  translated,  or 
otherwise  ;  in  the  absence  of  any  counter  testimony, 
we  have  strong  reason  to  confide  in  their  decision. 
Such  an  agreement  of  opinion  cannot  exist  without 
reason.  The  probable  reason  of  it  is,  convincing 
evidence. 

This  rule  lays  a  foundation  for  confidence  in  the  gen- 
eral correctness  of  our  common  English  translation 
of  the  Bible.  Commentators  and  other  learned  men 
of  every  respectable  denomination  of  Christians, 
and  many  who  have  not  been  the  adherents  of  any 
particular  sect,  have  generally  acquiesced  in  this  de- 
cision. They  have  given  in  their  united  testimony 
for  the  instruction  and  encouragement  of  all  those, 
who  are  incompetent  to  ascend  to  the  higher  sources 
of  evidence,  and  see  for  themselves.  This  agreement 
is  extensive,  embracing  persons  of  very  different  the- 
ological opinions.  It  is  general  with  those  of  the 
different  classes  to  which  it  extends.  The  cases  of 
dissent  from  it,  are  few  and  unimportant.  They  are 
not  of  sufficient  number  and  dignity  to  impair  the 
well  founded  confidence  which  arises  from  the  gene- 
ral agreement  of  the  wise  and  good  ;  an  agreement  at 
once  particular,  cordial  and  extensive. 

5.  A  translation  that  does  not  make  any  consist- 
ent sense,  must  be  wrong.     In  our  common  English 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  157 

Bible,  examples  of  this  are  rare ;  but  they  are  nu- 
merous in  the  controversial  works  of  some,  who 
with  little  knowledge  and  less  honesty,  have  endeav- 
ored to  translate  the  sacred  volume  so  as  lo  leave 
its  offensive  doctrines  behind. 

To  maintain  that  any  translation  is  correct,  which 
does  not  express  a  consistent  sense,  is  a  high  im- 
peachment of  the  inspired  writings.  It  is  as  much 
as  to  say,  that  God  has  inspired  men  to  write  non- 
sense ;  or  else  that  the  sacred  writers  were  not  in- 
spired at  all  by  God.  All  Scripture  is  given  by  in- 
spiration of  God,  and  being  thus  given,  is  profitable 
for  doctrine.  In  order  to  be  of  this  character,  it 
must  in  the  original  express  a  real  and  consistent 
sense,  and  in  every  correct  translation  it,  must  of 
course,  have  a  corresponding  signification. 

6.  In  cases  where  the  correctness  of  a  translation,  is 
both  advocated  and  opposed  by  learned  Biblical 
scholars,  common  readers,  if  they  think  it  important 
to  decide  where  the  truth  lies,  ought  to  examine 
thoroughly  the  different  sources  of  evidence  which 
are  accessible  to  them,  and  compare  the  amount  and 
validity  of  the  evidences  on  one  side,  with  those  of 
the  opposing  evidences  on  the  other.  In  this  way 
they  may  often  arrive  at  certain  and  correct  conclu^ 
sions,  while  others  more  learned  than  themselves, 
may  be  disquieting  their  minds  in  vain  with  doubts 
and  difficulties, and  disturbing  others  with  unprofita* 
ble  controversy.  The  sources  of  information  which 
are  accessible  to  all  intelligent  persons,  in  respect  to 
the  true  sense  of  the  Bible  in  the  original  languages, 


158  PARTICULAR    LAWS    OF 

are  sufficient  to  prevent  any  great  deception,  or  im- 
position in  regard  to  its  sense,  from  being  exten- 
sively practiced.  Individuals  are  found,  who  are 
bad  enough  to  make  this  nefarious  attempt.  Through 
the  credulity  and  voluntary  ignorance  of  some,  they 
have  succeeded  to  a  limited  extent.  Rut  they  can 
never  take  the  keys  of  knowledge  out  of  the  hands 
of  an  intelligent  and  inquisitive  community,  or  cut 
off  any  great  number  of  individuals  from  a  percep- 
tion of  the  truth.  They  may  cut  off  from  the  multi- 
tude some  of  the  rays  of  correct  Scriptural  know- 
ledge, but  they  cannot  blot  out  or  greatly  darken 
the  everlasting  sun  of  the  moral  heavens,  the  Bible. 

In  regard  to  ail  those  items  of  Scriptural  know- 
ledge which  depend  upon  learned  testimony,  and  in 
respect  to  which  the  testimony  of  learned  men  is  dis- 
cordant, we  ought  to  proceed  according  to  the  same 
rules  by  which  we  are  governed  in  harmonizing  dis- 
cordant testimony  on  other  subjects.  Self-contra- 
diction, manifestations  of  prejudice,  ignorance,  ab- 
surdity, are  as  indubitable  indications  of  error,  in  the 
court  of  theological  inquiry,  as  at  any  human  judg- 
ment seat. 

The  opposing  evidence  of  the  few  must  yield  to 
that  of  the  many  ;  and  that  of  those  who  are  mani- 
festly under  the  influence  of  prejudice,  or  of  selfish 
or  ambitious  desire,  or  any  other  bias,  to  the  higher 
testimony  of  the  unprejudiced  and  uncorrupted. 
Those  matters  of  testimony  which  are  sustained  by 
the  general  consent  of  the  wise  and  good,  cannot  be 
rendered  doubtful  by  the  counter  testimony  of  the 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  159 

few.  Certainly  not,  when  those  few  give  manifest 
indications  either  of  incompetency  or  dishonesty. 

7.  When  other  sources  of  information  are  inac- 
cessible or  unsatisfactory,  the  inquirer  who  is  un- 
skilled in  the  ancient  languages,  ought  to  consult  a 
competent  clergyman,  of  any  respectable  branch  of 
the  Christian  church,  on  the  matter  in  question.  He 
will  seldom  do  this  without  benefit,  if  not  with  com- 
plete satisfaction. 

Most  clergymen  have  opportunities  and  means  of 
information  on  religious  subjects,  which  but  few 
others  enjoy.  It  is  expected  therefore,  that  with  or- 
dinary natural  powers,  and  suitable  diligence  in  their 
high  vocation,  they  will  attain  a  superior  degree  of 
skill  and  knowledge,  in  respect  to  Divine  truth. 
The  benefits  of  this  may  be  enjoyed  by  every  can- 
did and  anxious  inquirer,  to  his  very  great  advan- 
tage and  comfort.  Valuable  knowledge  may  be  ob- 
tained in  this  and  other  ways,  if  men  will  take  the 
pains  requisite  to  attain  it. 

It  is  not  proposed  that  any  man's  private  opinions 
should  be  adopted,  as  a  rule  of  faith,  or  of  interpre- 
tation, by  the  unlearned.  To  pursue  such  a  course, 
would  be  to  renounce  the  liberal  exercise  of  judg- 
ment, and  to  surrender  ourselves  up  to  any  guidance 
which  may  happen  to  arrest  us.  But  it  is  recom- 
mended that  those  whose  information  on  religious 
subjects  is  necessarily  limited,  should  avail  them- 
selves of  the  more  extensive  and  accurate  know- 
ledge of  others.  This  they  may  easily  do  ;  and  by 
doing  it  be  greatly  benefitted. 


160  PARTICULAR   LAWS    OF 

Men's  knowledge  and  opinions  are  very  different 
things.  We  may  avail  ourselves  of  their  know- 
ledge on  important  subjects,  and  make  use  of  it  in 
correcting  our  own  opinions,  without  embracing 
theirs.  This  we  ought  to  do,  as  far  as  their  opin- 
ions are  unsupported  by  intelligible  and  decisive  ev- 
idence. 

The  laws  of  biblical  interpretation,  as 
they  have  been  developed  in  this  and  the  preceding 
chapters,  are  not  mere  matters  of  opinion,  or  of  ab- 
stract speculation.  For  the  most  part,  if  not  entire- 
ly, they  are  matters  of  absolute  and  certain  know- 
ledge. They  lay  the  foundation  of  an  art,  the  art 
of  Interpretation  ;  which  is  indispensable  to  any  use 
of  language,  and  some  practical  knowledge  of  which, 
is  universal.  They  constitute  the  elements  of  a  sci- 
ence, which  is  undoubtedly  destined  to  exert  an  im- 
portant agency  in  dispersing  the  clouds  of  ignorance, 
in  pouring  the  unobstructed  light  of  Divine  truth  on 
the  sou!,  and  in  diffusing  it  through  the  world.  This 
science  deserves  to  be  studied.  It  claims  the  pa- 
tient and  continued  attention  of  every  one  who  as- 
pires to  the  character  of  an  enlightened  Christian. 
It  ought  to  be  studied  in  its  elements,  as  a  distinct 
subject  of  investigation  and  inquiry,  in  order  to  be 
duly  understood  and  appreciated.  In  the  foregoing 
pages  these  elements,  it  is  believed,  have  been  truly 
and  intelligibly  stated.  As  far  as  this  is  the  case, 
and  no  farther,  let  them  be  received  with  favor,  and 
embraced  with  confidence. 


CHAPTER  IV. 
ERRONEOUS  MODES  OF  BIBLICAL  INTERPRETATION. 

Sec.  1.    The   rationalistic   mode  of  biblical 
interpretation. 

Some  of  the  truths  of  revealed  religion  are  so 
strongly  sustained  by  the  general  observation  and 
experience  of  mankind,  that  they  cannot  be  called 
in  question  even  by  unbelievers.  The  most  violent 
opposers  of  all  that  is  peculiar  and  superhuman  in 
the  Christian  system,  admit  these  obvious  truths  on 
other  grounds  than  the  Divine  authority  and  inspira- 
tion of  the  Scriptures,  and  are  willing  to  acknow- 
ledge them  as  a  part  of  common,  but  not  of  inspired 
truth. 

Other  parts  of  the  Christian  system  are  of  a  more 
spiritual  and  less  obvious  character.  Some  of  them 
relate  to  objects  and  events  which  are  entirely  be- 
yond the  sphere  of  human  observation,  and  of  un- 
assisted reason ;  and  are  altogether  different  from 
what  many  would  naturally  expect  to  find  in  an  in- 
spired system  of  religious  truth. 

Every  man  feels  the  utmost  confidence  in  those 

conclusions  which  are  the  fruit  of  his  own  careful 

and  accurate  observation,  or  of  his  own  sound  and 

legitimate  reasoning  from  certain  premises.     Every 

man  therefore,  possesses  a  degree  of   knowledge 

15 


162  ERRONEOUS    MODES   OF 

which  he  regards  as  certain  ;  and  much  of  which  is 
truly  of  this  character.  Some  religious  and  moral 
truths  belong  to  this  class,  and  are  perceived  with 
the  utmost  clearness,  even  by  infidels. 

But  while  all  men  believe,  with  a  confidence  that 
cannot  be  shaken,  their  own  personal  observations, 
and  their  own  legitimate  deductions  of  reason,  there 
are  many  who  have  no  faith  in  the  Bible.  If  they 
think  they  believe  it,  they  are  mistaken,  and  deceive 
themselves  by  erroneous  conceptions  of  what  faith  is. 
That  part  of  the  Bible  which  corresponds  with 
their  observation  and  experience,  and  which  har- 
monizes with  their  reasouings,  they  do  indeed  be- 
lieve; not  because  it  is  the  Bible,  but  truth  evi- 
denced to  them  by  other  means.  Beyond  this,  their 
faith  does  not  extend. 

Where  such  persons  assume  the  office  of  Biblical 
interpreters,  it  is  evidently  with  great  hazard  to  the 
interests  of  evangelical  truth.  Even  if  they  exercise 
this  office  with  the  greatest  honesty,  they  will  be  li- 
able to  lean  constantly  to  their  own  understandings, 
and  explain  that  which  lies  beyond  the  sphere  of 
their  personal  experience  and  observation,  not  by 
the  established  and  legitimate  principles  of  language, 
but  by  their  own  preconceived  and  limited  views; 
and  often  by  their  own  unfounded  conjectures. 

A  man  who  deals  with  the  Bible  as  an  uninspired 
production,  and  yields  to  its  authority  only  so  far  as 
sustained  by  what  he  conceives  to  be  the  dictates  of 
enlightened  reason ;  and  either  denies  or  explains 
away  all  those  parts  of  it  which  are  not  of  this  char- 
acter; is  termed  a  Rationalist.     His  highest  rule  of 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  163 

faith,  is  reason.  Beyond  where  unassisted  reason 
can  lead,  he  does  not  go  in  his  theological  opinions. 

This  class  of  interpreters  understand  and  explain 
some  of  parts  of  the  Bible  correctly.  But  whenever 
they  come  to  a  communication  which  legitimately 
expresses  a  sense  that  their  unassisted  reason  can- 
not or  does  not  verify,  they  stumble.  They  do  not 
admit  such  senses  to  be  correct,  and  feel  themselves 
authorized  to  adopt  some  modes  of  interpretation, 
however  forced  or  unnatural,  which  will  relieve 
them  from  the  embarrassment  in  question. 

The  distinguishing  principle  and  fundamental  er- 
ror therefore,  of  the  Rationalists,  and  of  their  sys- 
tem of  interpretation,  is  the  following,  namely  :  That 
the  Bible  cannot  legitimately  express  a  sense  which 
the  reason  and  experience  of  the  interpreter  do  not 
verify.  This  principle  is  not  openly  avowed  by  ma- 
ny in  this  country.  Perhaps  most  who  adopt  it,  are 
not  fully  aware  themselves  of  being  under  its  influ- 
ence. But  the  number  who  are  generally  or  par- 
tially under  its  influence,  is  by  no  means  small,  and 
the  errors  which  arise  and  are  sustained  by  this 
means,  are  not  few  or  harmless.  They  are  both  nu- 
merous and  hurtful  in  the  highest  degrees. 

Under  the  influence  of  this  principle,  men  find*  on- 
ly such  meanings  in  the  Bible  as  are  verified  by  their 
experience  and  reason.  More  than  this,  they  sup- 
pose it  cannot  express,  and  more  than  this  they  do 
not  allow  it  in  any  case  to  signify. 

Jn  pursuance  of  this  plan,  therefore,  different  per- 
sons find  sentiments  and  facts  utterly  diverse  from 
each  other,  in  the  same  passages ;  and  all  fail  to  per- 


164  ERRONEOUS    MODES    OF 

ceive  many  sublime  exhibitions  of  truth,  which  are 
developed  with  the  utmost  clearness  by  correct  modes 
of  interpretation. 

Where  the  correct  interpreter  finds  a  demon,  the 
Rationalist  finds  only  a  disease,  which  human  weak- 
ness and  prejudice  have  in  former  ages  ascribed  to 
supposed  demoniacal  influence.  Where  the  correct 
interpreter  finds  a  Devil,  an  apostate  evil  spirit,  the 
active  and  powerful  enemy  both  of  God  and  man  ; 
the  Rationalist  finds  only  an  evil  principle  in  the  hu- 
man heart,  and  that,  in  the  view  of  many,  but  a 
slight  and  unimportant  affair.  Where  the  former 
finds  a  revelation  respecting  hell,  a  place  of  endless 
and  intolerable  anguish,  both  10  fallen  spirits  and  the 
finally  impenitent  from  among  men  ;  the  latter  re- 
cognizes only  a  temporal  infl  ction  of  the  Divine 
wrath,  described  by  a  figurative  allusion  to  the  vale 
of  Hinnom.  Where  the  former  finds  indubitable 
evidence  of  a  stupendous  miracle,  indicating  the  di- 
rect agency  of  the  Almighty,  and  confirming  the  au- 
thority and  words  of  his  servants  ;  the  latter  often 
sees  only  a  singular  and  fortunate  concurrence  of 
ordinary  events,  tending  strongly  to  impress  the 
minds  of  beholders,  but  affording  no  decisive  evidence 
of  the  direct  and  special  interposition  of  God. 

This  method  of  interpretation  is  not  improperly 
denominated  the  Rationalistic.  It  is  founded  on  a 
mistaken  view  of  the  legitimate  provinces  of  rea- 
son and  revelation ;  or  rather  on  a  virtual  denial  of 
any  supernatural  revelation  at  all. 

The  Rationalists  are  the  more  dangerous,  because 
they  profess  to  establish  their  sentiments,  whatever 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  165 

they  are,  by  the  Bible,  when  their  fundamental  prin- 
ciple of  interpretation  is  utterly  erroneous,  and  one 
that  cannot  be  allowed  the  least  influence  in  deter- 
mining our  apprehensions  in  respect  to  the  Divine 
communications,  without  leading  to  error. 

The  principle  that  words  cannot  legitimately  ex- 
press a  sense  which  the  experience  and  reason  of 
the  interpreter  do  not  verify,  is  not  pretended  to  be 
applicable  to  the  ordinary  productions  of  men.  Not 
only  are  men  known  to  express  in  their  communica- 
tions, ideas  which  cannot  be  thus  verified ;  but  also 
such  as  are  absolutely  false.  With  this  fact  before 
us,  we  are  compelled  to  interpret  their  communica- 
tions by  the  obvious  and  established  laws  of  lan- 
guage, whatever  may  be  the  relation  of  what  they 
assert  to  our  experience  and  reason,  or  to  truth  it- 
self. The  contrariety  of  an  assertion  in  the  produc- 
tions of  men,  to  any  opinions  or  even  knowledge  of 
ours,  is  not  a  sufficient  reason  for  putting  on  that  as- 
sertion any  construction,  or  interpreting  it  in  any 
sense  not  authorized  by  the  established  and  obvious 
principles  of  language.  This  principle  is  generally 
acknowledged  in  respect  to  the  productions  of  men, 
and  it  is  equally  true  and  important  in  respect  to  the 
Bible. 

The  Rationalistic  mode  of  interpretation  is  shown 
to  be  erroneous  by  the  following  considerations, 
namely  : 

(1.)  It  is  inconsistent  with  the  nature  and  design 
of  the  Bible,  as  a  supernatural  communication  of  Di- 
vine truth. 

(2.)  It  implies  an  undue  extension  of  the  province 
15* 


166  ERRONEOUS    MODES    OF 

of  reason  and  experience,  in  this  department  of  hu- 
man knowledge. 

(3.)  It  introduces  a  rule  for  interpreting  the  higher 
and  more  difficult  portions  of  the  Bible,  which  is  ut- 
terly unsettled  and  contradictory,  the  preconceived 
opinions  of  men. 

1.  It  is  inconsistent  with  the  nature  and  design  of 
the  Bible,  as  a  supernatural  communication  of  Di- 
vine truth.  The  Bible  is  in  its  very  nature  a  rule  of 
faith  of  the  highest  order.  It  is  an  independent 
source  of  knowledge,  by  which  God  has  undertaken 
to  correct  the  errors  and  supply  the  deficiencies  of 
reason  and  experience.  It  is  of  itself  alone,  an  inde- 
pendent witness,  of  a  character  so  high,  and  so  enti- 
tled to  confidence,  that  it  does  not  need  the  confirm- 
ation of  collateral  evidence  to  make  its  declarations 
certain,  however  strange,  and  singular,  and  surpri- 
sing some  of  them  may  appear. 

The  assumption  therefore,  that  the  Bible  cannot, 
in  any  part  of  it,  express  a  credible  sense  in  which 
it  is  not  confirmed  by  the  experience  and  reason  of 
the  interpreter,  is  inconsistent  with  its  nature  and  de- 
sign, and  consequently  erroneous.  Such  an  assump- 
tion places  the  Bible  on  the  low  footing  of  a  fallible 
witness,  whose  testimony  is  good  for  nothing  when 
standing  alone,  but  is  rendered  valid  by  the  agreeing 
testimony  of  another.  The  testimony  of  the  Bible 
is  not  to  be  compared  to  that  of  a  single  witness  in 
court,  which  requires  other  collateral  evidence  to 
make  it  decisive  ;  but  rather  to  that  of  a  multitude 
of  witnesses,  so  great  and  so  disinterested,  so  intelli- 
gent and  harmonious,  and  of  such  unquestionable 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  167 

veracity,  as  to  establish,  beyond  contradiction  or 
cavil,  the  most  surprising  and  unaccountable  facts. 
This  view  of  the  Bible,  admitting  it  to  be  a  source 
of  knowledge  independent  of  all  others,  and  sufficient 
for  the  establishment  of  any  position  to  which  its  ev- 
idence is  clearly  afforded,  is  firmly  based  on  the  doc- 
trine of  its  Divine  authority  and  inspiration.  It  is 
fatal  therefore,  to  any  system  of  Interpretation  or  of 
doctrine,  incompatible  with  it. 

2.  The  Rationalistic  mode  of  interpretation  im- 
plies an  undue  extention  of  the  province  of  reason 
and  experience,  in  this  department  of  human  know- 
ledge. Reason,  considered  as  a  faculty  of  the  mind, 
denotes  that  power  by  which  we  infer  one  truth  from 
another.  All  that  knowledge  which  is  the  result  of 
comparison  and  inference,  is  gained  solely  by  the 
exercise  of  this  faculty.  Reason  therefore,  is  one  of 
the  original  sources  of  human  knowledge.  It  is  not 
however,  a  primary  one.  Perception,  conscious- 
ness and  testimony,  are  of  a  more  fundamental  char- 
acter, and  supply  reason  itself  with  materials  which 
are  indispensable  to  its  successful  exercise.  Reason 
has  its  appropriate  sphere,  within  which  it  is  the  sole 
umpire  of  truth.  Jn  this  sphere  its  legitimate  and 
unbiased  decisions  are  certain,  and  in  many  cases 
alone. 

The  appropriate  sphere  of  reason  is  extended.  It 
embraces  all  the  truths  of  perception,  consciousness, 
and  testimony,  as  the  means  of  ascent  to  those  which 
are  still  higher  and  less  accessible.  But  its  concur- 
ing  testimony  is  not  necessary  for  the  establishment 
of  these  elementary  truths.    They  are  introduced  to 


168  ERRONEOUS   MODES   OP 

the  mind  by  their  appropriate  channels,  and  estab- 
lished without  the  aid  of  reason,  by  their  respective 
sources  of  evidence.  Those  of  perception  are  intro- 
duced and  established  by  perception  ;  those  of  con- 
sciousness, by  consciousness  ;  and  those  of  testimo- 
ny, by  testimony. 

These  different  means  of  knowledge,  legitimately 
and  rightly  used,  cannot  contradict  each  other,  be- 
cause truth  is  not  contradictory.  If  it  were,  they 
could  and  would.  Whenever  they  are  so  used  as  to 
become  contradictory,  we  have  evidence  in  that  fact 
that  they  are  used  improperly  ;  and  are  admonished 
at  once  to  examine  the  modes  in  which  contradicto- 
ry results  have  been  attained,  with  a  view  to  ascer- 
tain and  correct  those  results,  by  correcting  the  er- 
roneous mental  process  which  produced  them. 

The  Bible  occupies  the  department  of  testimony. 
Within  the  limits  of  that  department,  and  interpret- 
ed according  to  the  legitimate  principles  and  laws 
of  language,  its  indications  of  truth  are  incontrovert- 
ible and  certain.  To  reject  any  of  them,  or  explain 
them  away,  in  violation  of  the  established  principles 
and  laws  of  language,  because  they  have  not  the 
concurring  support  of  the  reason  or  experience  of 
the  interpreter,  is  to  extend  reason  and  experience 
beyond  their  proper  limits,  to  the  prejudice  of  anoth- 
er equally  certain  and  decisive  means  of  informa- 
tion. On  this  ground  therefore,  the  Rationalistic 
mode  of  Interpretation  is  shown  to  be  erroneous, 
and  ought  to  be  rejected  and  discountenanced. 

3.  The  Rationalistic  mode  of  interpretation  intro- 
duces a  rule  for  the  explanation  of  the  more  difficult 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  169 

and  important  portions  of  the  Bible,  which  is  utterly 
unsettled  and  contradictory ;  the  preconceived  and 
uncertain  opinions  of  men.  It  not  oniy  limits  the 
disclosures  of  Divine  truth  to  the  sphere  of  merely 
human  knowledge,  by  which  much  of  the  Bible  is 
wrested  from  its  obvious  import,  but  assigns  to  pre- 
conceived opinion  and  plausible  conjecture,  in  re- 
gard to  religious  subjects,  an  authority,  which  it  de- 
nies to  the  most  explicit  declarations  of  the  word  of 
God. 

Knowledge,  from  whatever  source  derived,  con- 
tributes to  promote  the  correct  interpretation  of  the 
Scriptures.  All  interpretations  which  represent  the 
Bible  as  contradictory  to  our  certain  knowledge, 
must  be  wrong.  God  does  not  teach  one  thing  by 
the  objects  of  perception,  consciousness,  and  reason, 
and  the  opposite  by  direct  revelation.  But  he  does 
communicate  by  the  joint  use  of  all  the  different 
modes  of  instruction,  different  parts  of  one  great 
harmonious  system  of  truth.  Every  part  of  this 
system,  rightly  understood,  is  in  agreement  with  ev- 
ery other.  Accurate  and  certain  knowledge  derived 
from  any  one  source  of  information,  contributes  es- 
sentially to  facilitate  the  acquisition  of  related  truths 
derived  from  others.  Indications  of  truth,  both  in 
the  Bible  and  elsewhere,  which  would  otherwise  be 
obscure,  are  often  rendered  perspicuous  by  means 
of  related  knowledge,  derived  from  other  sources. 
On  the  same  principle,  the  perceptions  of  one  sense 
contribute  to  render  those  of  another  determinate 
and  satisfactory.  The  perceptions  of  touch  often 
correct  those  of  sight,  when  they  would  otherwise 


170  ERRONEOUS    MODES    OF 

be  indefinite  or  erroneous  ;  and  those  of  sight,  the 
kindred  perceptions  of  hearing,  &c. 

The  certainty  of  knowledge  is  generally  increas- 
ed when  the  same  truth  is  demonstrated  by  different 
and  independent  sources  of  evidence.  But  the  un- 
certain and  conjectural  conclusions,  derived  from 
one  source  of  information,  may  not  be  allowed  in 
any  way  to  limit  or  modify,  much  less  to  contradict, 
the  unequivocal  indications  of  truth,  by  any  other 
means. 

The  opinions  which  are  derive*  1  from  the  ordina- 
ry sources  of  information,  in  respect  to  religious  sub- 
jects, are  obviously  vague  and  conjectural.  Unless 
we  are  allowed  to  go  to  the  Bible  as  a  depository  of 
certain  knowledge,  capable  of  making  wise  the  ig- 
norant, and  of  establishing  to  the  conviction  of  every 
well  regulated  mind,  truths  which  are  utterly  unat- 
tainable by  other  means,  our  possession  of  this  vol- 
ume seems,  so  far  as  faith  is  concerned,  to  be  of  ve- 
ry little  consequence  or  utility. 

Different  interpreters  entering  upon  the  study  of 
it,  with  different  degrees  of  human  knowledge,  and 
with  different  preconceived  opinions  on  many  of  the 
subjects  to  which  it  relates,  will  find  in  it  different 
and  contradictory  senses,  according  to  their  previous 
knowledge  and  opinions. 

But  what  authority  have  we  for  applying  an  un- 
certain rule  of  interpretation  to  the  explanation  of 
the  inspired  records?  Have  we  Scriptural  authority 
for  it  ?  None.  Has  this  rule  any  adequate  founda- 
tion in  reason  ?  None.  What  could  have  induced 
our  benevolent  Creator  to  give  us  any  inspired  com- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  171 

munieations  at  all,  unless  he  constructed  them  ac- 
cording to  definite  and  certain  rules  ? 

But  if  these  communications  are  capable  of  being 
interpreted  by  certain  and  definite  rules,  that  in 
question  is  not  one  of  them,  for  it  is  manifestly  and 
necessarily  indefinite  and  uncertain. 

Much  of  the  error  that  has  prevailed  in  former 
times,  and  which  continues  at  this  moment  to  re- 
ceive the  confidence  of  misguided  multitudes,  has 
arisen  from  a  Rationalistic  principle  of  interpreta- 
tion. Many  who  are  not  Rationalists,  some  who 
are  hopefully  pious,  through  neglect  to  inform  them- 
selves on  this  subject,  have  allowed  the  supposed  dic- 
tates of  perception  and  reason  to  come  in  unauthor- 
ized and  prevailing  collision  with  the  responses  of 
the  Holy  Spirit;  and  by  applying  erroneous  human 
opinions  to  the  interpretation  of  some  parts  of  the 
Bible,  have  greatly  erred  from  the  simplicity  and 
and  purity  of  the  gospel  faith,  and  greatly  impeded 
the  progress  and  triumphs  of  truth  and  piety,  over 
human  ignorance  and  perverseness. 

Sec  2.    The  mystical  mode  of  biblical  inter- 
pretation. 

The  word  Mystical  denotes  (1.)  obscure,  hid  ;  (2.) 
remote  from  human  observation;  (3.)  of  a  mysteri- 
ous allegorical,  or  emblematical  import.  As  appli- 
ed in  the  title  of  this  section,  it  is  used  to  designate 
a  mode  of  Interpretation,  in  which  the  obvious  and 
natural  import  of  words  and  phrases,  is  superceded 
by  less  obvious  and  allegorical  or  emblematical  sig- 


17S  ERRONEOUS    MODES    OF 

nifications,  not  indicated  by  the  manifest  and  estab- 
lished laws  of  language. 

Many  who  are  generally  correct  in  respect  to  their 
modes  of  Biblical  Interpretation  occasionally  err  by 
adopting  some  modification  of  that  now  to  be  con- 
sidered. Some  adopt  it  in  a  few  instances,  and  some 
in  many,  who  discard  it  in  other  cases.  A  few  in 
almost  every  successive  age  of  the  church,  have 
adopted  it  generally  in  their  study  and  exposition 
of  the  Bible  ;  and  have  received  extensively  the 
denomination  of  Mystics.  Multitudes,  however, 
are  occasionally,  and  in  some  degree  mystical  in 
their  interpretations,  who  are  not  properly  Mystics  ; 
and  many  perhaps  are  properly  Mystics,  who  are 
not  conscious  of  it  themselves,  and  have  never  been 
so  considered  and  denominated  by  others. 

The  Mystical  mode  of  interpretation  is  in  most 
respects  the  very  opposite  of  the  Rationalistic.  The 
latter  falls  below  the  true  sense  of  those  portions  of 
the  Bible  to  which  it  is  applied  ;  the  former  rises 
above,  and  goes  beyond  it.  The  latter  is  erroneous 
in  consequence  of  too  great  an  extension  of  the  office 
and  authority  of  reason  ;  the  former  by  the  introduc- 
tion of  a  different,  foreign,  and  often  opposing  ele- 
ment, equally  impertinent  and  delusive. 

Rationalistic  interpretation  is  the  natural  offspring 
and  ally  of  infidelity ;  mystic  bears  a  correspond- 
ing relation  to  enthusiasm,  fanaticism,  and  super- 
stition. Both  have  greatly  impeded  the  diffusion  of 
the  truth,  and  retarded  the  progress  and  establish- 
ment of  the  Christian  religion,  in  ancient  and  modern 
times.     Both  however,  in  some  of  their  applications 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  173 

are  often  found  in  an  unnatural  and  disastrous  alli- 
ance with  genuine,  humble,  and  sober  piety. 

The  principal  varieties  of  Mystic  Interpretation 
may  be  included  under  the  following  heads,  namely  ; 
(1.)  the  allegorical ;  (2.)  the  doctrinal ;  (3.)  the  sen- 
timental ;    (4.)    the   speculative  and  philosophical. 

These  modes  of  Interpretation  possess  consid- 
erable and  obvious  diversity  of  character,  but  they 
have  a  general  resemblance  or  analogy  to  each 
other,  in  consequence  of  which,  they  are  here  class- 
ed under  the  same  generic  head,  and  admit  of  being 
refuted  by  the  same  general  course  of  argument. 

1.  The  allegorical.  This  variety  of  Mystical  in- 
terpretation consists  in  putting  an  allegorical  con- 
struction on  parts  of  the  Bible  which  are  not  of  an 
allegorical  nature.  It  was  practiced  to  some  extent 
among  the  Jews  previous  to  the  Christian  era.  In- 
stances of  it  occur  in  Josephus  and  Philo,  Jewish 
writers  who  lived  near  the  time  of  Christ.  It  was 
early  adopted  by  some  of  the  leading  writers  of  the 
Christian  church,  and  extensively  disseminated  by 
their  means.  Origen  went  further  into  allegorical 
expositions  of  this  kind,  than  any  who  preceded  him  ; 
and  by  reason  of  his  extensive  learning,  superior 
genius,  and  indefatigable  industry  in  the  exposition 
of  the  Scriptures,  exerted  a  powerful  and  extensive 
influence  in  favor  of  his  peculiar  sentiments  on  this 
as  on  other  subjects. 

Having  embraced  the   Platonic  idea,  that  this 

world  is  strictly  and  universally  emblematical  of  that 

which  is  invisible,  and  that  the  objects  and  events  of 

one  correspond  to  those  of  the  other,  he  was  natu- 

16 


174  ERRONEOUS    MODES    OP 

rally  induced  to  search  for  symbolical  descriptions  of 
invisible  realities,  in  the  historical  narratives  of  earth- 
ly objects,  which  occur  in  the  Bible  generally. 

He  attributed  to  the  Scriptures  generally,  a  double 
or  treble  sense  ;  one,  that  which  is  indicated  by  the 
ordinary  laws  of  Interpretation  ;  the  others,  conceal- 
ed symbolical  or  figurative  ones,  to  be  developed  by 
higher  principles. 

Emmanuel  Swedenborg  has  more  recently  revi- 
ved and  remodeled  the  Mystic  system  of  Interpre- 
tation adopted  by  the  ancients,  and  has  gained  some 
adherents  to  the  belief,  that  the  Scriptures  have 
three  independent  and  collateral  senses,  the  literal, 
spiritual,  and  celestial. 

The  Mystical  mode  of  Interpretation,  as  embra- 
ced by  Origen  and  Swedenborg,  is  founded  on  the 
assumption  that  there  is  such  a  correspondence  be- 
tween material  and  spiritual,  terrestrial  and  celestial 
objects  and  events,  as  to  make  the  former  correct 
and  adequate  types  or  symbols  of  the  latter. 

This  supposed  resemblance  is  called  the  doctrine 
of  correspondences.  To  the  extent  however,  which 
is  assumed  by  these  interpreters,  that  doctrine  is 
without  any  foundation  in  Scripture  or  reason.  The 
Bible  does  not  assert  it ;  neither  is  it  clearly  implied 
in  any  thing  which  the  Bible  contains.  The  figura- 
tive language  and  material  symbols  of  the  Bible  are 
authorized  by  the  principle  of  general  analogies,  and 
do  not  require  an  assumption  so  extravagant  as  that 
in  question,  to  justify  the  use  of  them. 

Earth  resembles  heaven  ;  body,  mind  ;  the  sun, 
God  ;  and  light,  knowledge,  &c.  just  as  far  as  these 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION.  175 

respective  objects  possess  common  properties  and 
relations,  and  no  farther.  The  same  may  be  said  of 
all  other  objects  which  are  referred  to  in  the  figura- 
tive or  symbolical  communications  of  the  Bible. 

The  allegorical  systems  of  Origen  and  Sweden- 
borg,  fall  to  the  ground  for  the  want  of  any  decisive 
evidence  to  sustain  them.  They  are  ingenious  and 
facinating ;  but  they  are  not  built  on  the  rock,  and 
cannot  withstand  the  trial  of  sober  and  enlightened 
scrutiny. 

The  principle,  than  which  none  is  more  obvious 
and  important,  that  we  may  not  in  any  case  impose 
allegorical  or  symbolical  senses  on  the  Scriptures, 
any  more  than  on  other  communications,  without 
clear  and  manifest  indications  of  such  usage,  binds 
us  indissolubly  to  the  true  theory  on  this  subject. 
Faithfully  applied  and  carried  out,  it  restrains  us 
from  any  unauthorized  interpretations  of  the  kind 
which  have  now  been  specified. 

Slight  deviations  however,  into  the  track  of  mys- 
tycal  allegory,  through  a  neglect  of  this  principle, 
are  not  uncommon  in  many  of  the  best  writers ; 
and  are  often  indulged  by  the  ignorant  with  the  most 
injurious  and  unlicensed  freedom. 

2.  The  doctrinal.  Those  may  not  improperly  be 
termed  doctrinal  Mystics,  who  deviate  from  the  right 
understanding  and  exposition  of  the  Scriptures,  by 
giving  an  undue  prominence  to  some  of  their  doc- 
trines, and  making  an  unauthorized  use  of  them  in 
Biblical  Interpretation.  Some  are  not  satisfied  with 
finding  particular  doctrines  occupying  their  appro- 
priate places  in  the  Bible.     They  wish  to  find  them 


176  ERRONEOUS    MODES    OF 

in  every  part  of  it ;  and  are  unwilling  to  acknow- 
ledge the  existence  of  other  doctrines,  revealed  with 
equal  clearness,  because  of  some  supposed  discre- 
pancy between  them  and  their  favorite  doctrinal 
opinions.  Errors  from  this  source  are  almost  innu- 
merable. Many  excellent  and  intelligent  persons 
are  not  altogether  free  from  them.  Mystics  of  the 
worst  character  have  achieved  their  greatest  victo- 
ries over  the  truth,  in  this  field.  It  is  a  moral  acel- 
dama,  a  field  of  blood,  where  the  mighty  have  fallen 
with  the  temporary  fall  of  truth,  which  they  have 
struggled  hard,  and  for  a  time  successfully,  to  over- 
come. 

Almost  every  class  of  fanatics  and  enthusiasts 
have  distinguished  themselves  in  this  field  of  errone- 
ous interpretation.  It  is  characteristic  of  the  enthu- 
siast to  look  at  one  real  or  supposed  truth,  or  class 
of  truths,  till  he  loses  the  capacity  of  seeing  or  ap- 
preciating others.  It  is  impossible  for  such  a  one 
rightly  to  interpret  the  Bible.  Its  truths  are  various. 
They  require  to  be  looked  upon  with  a  sound  and 
steady  eye,  and  to  be  analyzed  with  a  calm  and 
steady  hand.  They  cannot  be  seen  with  clearness 
in  their  due  proportions  and  relations,  under  any 
other  conditions. 

3.  The  sentimental.  Those  may  be  denominated 
sentimental  Mystics,  who  suffer  themselves  to  be 
controlled  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Bible  by  their 
own  supposed  supernatural  impressions  in  regard  to 
it.  A  misunderstanding  of  the  Scripture  doctrine 
respecting  Divine  influence  and  illumination,  has 
greatly  contributed  to  delusions  of  this  kind.     An 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  177 

inexplicable  impression  is  with  many  a  sufficient 
reason  for  unhesitating  confidence* 

Such  persons  would  do  well  to  consider  that  we 
are  required  not  to  believe  every  spirit,  but  to  try 
the  spirits,  whether  they  be  of  God.  1  John  iv.  1. 
Our  impressions  are  not  infallible,  even  in  our  holi- 
est states  of  mind.  They  need  to  be  brought  to  the 
test  of  Scripture,  and  their  character  impartially  de- 
termined at  that  tribunal,  before  they  can  be  worthy 
to  be  cherished  with  confidence,  or  to  be  regarded 
as  of  the  least  authority,  in  determining  our  religious 
belief  respecting  other  matters. 

4.  The  speculative  and  philosophical.  A  specula- 
tive or  philosophical  Mystic,  is  one  who  suffers  his 
speculative  and  philosophical  opinions  to  exert  an 
undue  influence  in  determining  his  apprehensions 
of  Bible  truth.  Many  of  the  ancient  Mystics  were 
of  this  class.  Their  interpretations  of  the  Bible  were 
rendered  utterly  erroneous,  by  an  erroneous  philo- 
sophy. Had  their  philosophical  speculations  been 
correct,  or  had  they  strenuously  preserved  their 
minds  from  being  unduly  biased  in  their  interpreta- 
tions of  the  Bible,  by  those  speculations,  they  might 
have  avoided  many  hurtful  errors  into  which  they 
fell,  and  have  apprehended  with  clearness  many  glo- 
rious truths,  to  which  they  never  attained. 

The  reign  of  false  philosophy  has  been  long  and 
disastrous.  No  man  can  be  in  any  degree  acquaint- 
ed with  its  history,  without  receiving  painful  convic- 
tion of  its  prevalence,  both  over  the  dictates  of  hu- 
man reason,  and  the  unambiguous  testimony  of  the 
word  of  God. 

16* 


178  ERRONEOUS    MODES   OP 

Would  that  the  history  of  its  unhappy  prevalence 
was  exclusively  that  of  the  past.  But  this  is  far 
from  being  the  case.  False  philosophy,  in  its  more 
refined  and  deceptive  varieties,  still  sways  a  power- 
ful scepter,  and  occupies  a  strongly  guarded  throne. 
It  exerts  an  influence  with  thousands,  to  darken  that 
which  is  even  luminous  in  the  Bible,  and  perplex 
that  which  is  obscure. 

The  Mystical  mode  of  interpretation,  as  exhibited 
in  this  article,  is  like  the  beast  of  the  Apocalypse, 
having  many  heads  and  more  horns ;  and  like  him 
too,  is  the  fierce  antagonist  of  her,  whose  sun-clad 
form  and  starry  crown,  betoken  her  the  joy  of  the 
earth  and  the  favorite  of  heaven. 

(I.)  In  all  its  varieties,  it  is  inconsistent  with  the 
established  principles  and  laws  of  language,  and 
leads  to  manifest  violations  of  them.  On  this  ground 
therefore,  it  ought  to  be  rejected. 

(2.)  It  is  not  authorized  by  the  Bible  itself.  There 
is  no  passage  in  the  sacred  volume  which  directs  us 
to  explain  it  by  any  other  than  the  natural  and  obvi- 
ous principles  of  language.  Among  those  principles 
the  mystical  element  is  not  to  be  found. 

The  origin  and  history  of  this  mode  of  interpreta- 
tion, are  against  it.  It  cannot  be  traced  to  the  schools 
of  the  prophets,  or  to  the  communications  of  the  Bi- 
ble. The  later  inspired  writers  often  quote  from  the 
productions  of  their  inspired  predecessors,  and  com- 
ment upon  the  words  thus  introduced  ;  but  they  do 
not,  in  all  their  expositions  of  earlier  Scripture,  de- 
velope  any  other  mode  of  interpretation,  than  that 
which  is  based  on  the  common  and  established  prin- 


BIBLICAL   INTERPRETATION.  179 

ciples  of  human  language.  Much  less  do  they  en- 
roll among  their  laws  of  interpretation  either  of  the 
Mystic  principles  which  have  been  exhibited  in  the 
present  section.  These  principles  are  not  establish- 
ed by  any  Scriptural  precept,  or  any  Divinely  au- 
thorized example.  Authentic  history  has  traced 
them  to  the  instructions  of  Jewish  Rabbis',  who 
made  void  the  law  of  God  by  their  puerile  and  ab- 
surd traditions;  and  to  the  schools  of  heathen  phi- 
losophy, whose  very  light  was  the  refined  darkness 
of  Paganism  ;  but  it  has  been  unable  to  discover  for 
them  a  nobler  and  less  suspicious  genealogy.  Christ 
was  not  a  Mystic.  The  apostles  adhered  to  the  es- 
tablished and  universal  principles  of  Interpretation, 
both  in  relating  the  inimitable  discourses  of  our  Lord, 
and  in  commenting  upon  them  ;  in  their  history  of 
the  origin  and  early  progress  of  the  Christian  church  ; 
and  in  their  expositions  of  its  institutions  and  doc- 
trines. From  the  course  which  is  thus  indicated  by 
Scriptural  example,  with  no  Scriptural  precept  for 
our  guide,  we  may  not  innocently  or  safely  depart. 
The  Mystic  mode  of  interpretation,  involving  a  de- 
parture from  that  course  so  fully  authorized  both  by 
Scripture  and  reason,  is  manifestly  erroneous,  and 
the  adoption  of  it  proves  injurious  to  the  interests 
both  of  truth  and  piety. 

If  God  had  intended  that  the  Bible  should  be  in- 
terpreted in  mystical  senses,  or  in  any  other  not  in- 
dicated by  the  known  principles  of  language,  he 
doubtless  would  have  given  unequivocal  evidence  of 
this  fact.     But  he  has  not  done  so.     We  therefore 


180  ERRONEOUS   MODES   OP 

conclude  with  confidence,  that  he  had  no  intention  of 
this  kind. 

(3.)  The  Mystical  mode  of  interpretation  is  inju- 
rious to  the  interests  of  religion,  in  leading  persons 
to  neglect  and  undervalue  the  plain  and  obvious 
sense  of  many  parts  of  the  Bible.  In  the  Bible,  in- 
terpreted according  to  the  established  principles  and 
laws  of  language,  are  treasured  up  the  unquestiona- 
ble doctrines  and  duties  of  the  Christian  religion. 
No  valuable  additions  can  be  made  to  these,  by  mys- 
tical interpretations.  Not  a  valuable  doctrine,  not 
an  obvious  and  important  duty,  can  be  discovered 
by  mystical  interpretations,  which  cannot  be  fully 
demonstrated  by  other  means.  All  the  doctrines  and 
duties  which  are  needful  for  the  promotion  of  per- 
sonal holiness,  are  fully  developed  by  the  other  and 
unquestionable  modes  of  Biblical  Interpretation.  If 
the  study  of  these  doctrines,  and  the  practice  of 
these  duties  are  properly  attended  to  and  prosecu- 
ted, religion  will  prosper.  If  they  are  neglected,  it 
will  inevitably  decline.  In  leading  to  an  undervalu- 
ation and  neglect  of  them,  Mystical  interpretation 
has  proved  exceedingly  injurious,  and  brought  forth 
the  manifest  fruits  of  delusion,  sin- and  death.  In- 
asmuch as  a  tree  is  known  by  its  fruits,  that  mode 
of  interpretation  which  leads  inevitably  to  the  rejec- 
tion of  certain  truth,  and  to  the  neglect  of  manifest 
duty,  must  be  wrong. 

With  correct  modes  of  interpretation,  persons  may 
fall  into  error,  in  respect  to  difficult  words  and  par- 
agraphs. But  their  errors  will  be  occasional  and 
vincible.     Under  the  guidance  of  erroneous  princi- 


BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION*.  181 

pies,  however,  like  those  which  have  been  specified 
in  this  chapter,  erroneous  interpretations  are  greatly 
multiplied.  They  occur  not  only  in  respect  to  pas- 
sages which  are  really  obscure  and  difficult,  but  in 
respect  to  those  which  would  otherwise  be  of  the 
plainest  and  most  obvious  import. 

Right  modes  of  interpretation  may,  through  inat- 
tention or  ignorance,  conduct  to  error ;  but  those 
which  are  fundamentally  wrong,  are  the  more  fatal 
to  the  interests  of  truth,  the  more  faithfully  and  in- 
telligently they  are  applied.  They  are  often  used 
with  surprising  skill,  and  operate  with  tremenduous 
effect,  both  in  obscuring  the  vision  of  those  who  use 
them,  and  in  deceiving  others.  If  a  man  has  fallen 
into  doctrinal  errors  by  means  of  a  Rationalistic  or 
Mystic  mode  of  interpretation,  it  is  generally  in  vain 
to  endeavor  to  correct  them,  till  he  is  made  sensible 
of  the  fallacy  of  those  principles  by  which  he  is  mis- 
led. While  that  fallacy  is  unperceived,  he  builds 
with  confidence  on  his  sandy  foundation ;  and 
not  till  it  is  swept  away,  can  he  be  forced  to  aban- 
don the  often  well  wrought  but  misplaced  fabric  of 
his  souTs  regard. 

Then  he  sees  his  error,  not  by  discovering  the  im- 
perfection and  inconclusiveness  of  the  argument 
which  betrayed  him  into  it.  That  argument  perhaps 
was  perfect.  But  by  discovering  the  incorrectness 
of  the  assumption  on  which  the  fatal  argument  was 
founded.  The  moment  he  makes  that  discovery, 
all  that  before  was  perplexed,  becomes  plain,  and 
the  errors  which  appeared  invincible,  are  instantly 
detected  and  renounced. 


182  ERRONEOUS    MODES   OF,    &C. 

Let  every  man  therefore,  prove  his  own  work, 
and  examine  thoroughly  the  principles  and  rules  of 
interpretation  which  he  adopts,  and  his  mode  of  ap- 
plying them  to  the  sacred  writings.  An  error  in  re- 
spect to  either,  may  lead  to  numberless  related  and 
consequent  errors,  of  the  most  injurious  nature. 


NOTES. 


1.  For  a  confirmation  of  the  foregoing  statements  in  respect  to  Ori- 
gen,  and  for  a  more  particular  account  of  his  character  and  modes  of 
interpretation,  the  reader  is  referred  to  Murdock's  translation  of  Mos- 
heim,  Vol.  I.  pages  198,  216—217,  219—221. 

2  .Within  the  last  year  or  two,  several  important  contributions  have 
been  made  to  that  department  of  Biblical  literature  to  which  the  pre- 
sent work  appertains.  But  none  have  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
author,  which  accomplish  the  design  he  has  had  in  view,  and  to  which 
his  efforts  have  been  humbly  but  earnestly  directed  in  the  preceding 
investigation,  namely  :  That  of  furnishing  a  complete  manual  of  this 
interesting  science,  adapted  to  the  existing  state  of  knowledge  and 
opinion  on  this  subject,  and  designed  for  common  as  well  as  scientific 
and  theological  use.  If  the  principles  of  this  work  are  correct,  they 
are  of  paramount  importance  to  all  men,  and  ought  to  be  the  object  of 
general  inquiry  and  investigation,  with  those  of  every  age  and  condi- 
tion in  life. 


DATE  DUE 

iHpwiiiSiiisfti 

*»V 

S*t^^t^Z'F^\ 

GAYLORD 

PRINTED  IN  U.S.A. 

BS476  .S27 

The  elements  of  Biblical  interpretation, 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00006  3729 


mm 


